Talk:Siege of Oxford (1142)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Siege of Oxford (1142)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ed! (talk · contribs) 20:48, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Looking at this one. —Ed!^(talk) 20:48, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria) (see here for this contributor's history of GA reviews)

1. It is reasonably well written:

   Dab links and external links show no problems. Copyvio tool returns no problems. Any chance you could take a look at the duplicate links? I see a few redundant bluelinks there.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable:

   Pass Offline references accepted in good faith. Cursory check of Google Books shows references that back up source material here.

3. It is broad in its coverage:

   Not Yet

   • Would think an infobox would be helpful at the top of the article. Thoughts?

   See below!

   • Background: Any relative size of the militaries of the two?

   Strictly unknown I'm afraid; but I have managed to find commentary on the possible size of an army a few years later which should provide some context.

   • What's Oxford's population at the time?

   Unknown; the earliest I can find is the mid 14th-c., which, being 200 years later, would probably be worse than useless?

   • What are the details of Stephen's release from captivity? Would be fine to add as a footnote.

   Have expanded on the background to his captivity and release, via a footnote as suggested.

   Done—footnoted.

   • "Empress' armed householdmen,[47] a relatively small force of soldiers.[65]"-- Any estimates on size here? Or overall size of this unit?

   I'm afraid the only clarification I've been able to add is that the number is unknown!

   • Siege: What was the date that the siege of the castle itself began? When he arrived is established but not when he had taken control of Oxford and began focusing on the castle itself.

   Same day apparently: the garrison seems to have collapsed.

   • "There was a locus of sympathisers about 13 miles away, " -- {{convert}} template needed here and for all distances. Whichever unit is best, but kilometers is probably preferred here.

   Done.

   • "Matilda's small force, meanwhile, remained "pinned down"[66] by the royal blockade, becoming weaker with hunger daily.[66]" -- Previous graph seemed to indicate the castle was "well provisioned?"

   True, tweaked to reflect that their provisions were running out by now.

   • Escape: "elements within Stephen's army had "deserted and others grew slack"." -- Any word on likely afflictions?

   Acc. Crouch, a general malaise of civil war when everyone realises that they are all the ultimate losers, etc: added.

   • Note 22 mentions a relief column, maybe should be expanded? Previous prose seemed to indicate Matilda's forces preferred a counter-siege of a different castle to direct counter-attack of Oxford.

   Added a bit of context from Richard Barber.

   • How many were in the castle when recaptured and what became of them?

   Again unknown, I'm afraid.

   • "Thames Valley to make an—in the attempt, unsuccessful—attempt to recapture Wareham, which the earl had since refortified.[91]" -- Don't fully understand this sentence.

   I've tweaked it slightly, and clarified that Rob was in Wallingford rather than the more-vague Thames Valley?

   • Any talk of casualties in the overall event?

   Again...

   • A book is needed for Ref 45.

   Done.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy:

   Pass A lot of variety in the source material.

5. It is stable:

   Pass No problems there.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate:

   Pass Six images tagged PD or CC, where appropriate.

7. Other:

   On Hold Pending some comments. —Ed!^(talk) 21:47, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ed!, thanks for the reminder—apologies for the delay, I'm afraid it fell off my radar! Part of the reason is that I spent much of last Saturday trying to source your queries—and mostly failing. I'll be honest, much of what you ask for is frankly unknown; 12th-century chroniclers were most inconsiderate to the needs of the 21st-century encyclopaedist! That's the main reason I didn't put an IB in originally; most of the detailed information that would sit snugly in an IB is unavailable. For example the size of their armies; the population of Oxford (at least, not until the early 14th-century); the forces involved in the siege; casualties, etc. are unknown. Of course, your prose-related queries are much easier to resolve. What say ye? ——SerialNumber54129

Understood, if you could resolve what you can, will take another look. —Ed!^(talk) 19:01, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

@Serial Number 54129: Just want to see where you are on this one! —Ed!^(talk) 00:08, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, Ed!, I've been "AFK" for a couple of weeks  :) I'll get to it soon though. Cheers! ——SerialNumber54129 14:00, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

@Ed!: Sorry agan for the delay over this; I've now addressed all your points, and—where possible!—actually done something with them. But I apologise again that a lot of the interesting detail has not survived (that I could find in RSs, anyway) the passage of 850 years! ——SerialNumber54129 20:40, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Sounds good. Looking at the fixes you've made, I believe this is ready for GA. Going to Pass now, thank you for the additional research. —Ed!^(talk) 03:22, 26 February 2019 (UTC)