Talk:William Ufford, 2nd Earl of Suffolk

typo?

I have made the assumption that a reference to "land holdins" was intended to be "land holdings" and made the correction accordingly. If I was in error, please revert. Ed8r (talk) 16:17, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

My mistake, was fixing syntax rather quickly today. Sadads (talk) 03:23, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:52, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

---

William d'Ufford, 2nd Earl of Suffolk → William de Ufford, 2nd Earl of Suffolk — The contraction seems archaic, and isn't used in most contemporary sources. Lampman (talk) 14:32, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Support per Complete Peerage. More than anachronism, this is because the contemporary sources are overwhelmingly not in French (much less English), but Latin. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:22, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:William de Ufford, 2nd Earl of Suffolk/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Renata (talk) 10:51, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Generally, the article seems ok. But I do have a couple rather minor nitpicks and clarification requests.

1. Please use William, Suffolk, and Ufford consistently. Pick one name and stick to it.
2. "On 4 November 1369, William's father died and William was invested with the earldom of Suffolk soon after." -> when did his brothers die? who were they?
3. "William and Thomas Beauchamp were going overseas" -> change to "William de Ufford and Thomas Beauchamp" as it seems you are talking about two Beauchamp brothers.
4. "he participated in the rather unsuccessful campaigns of 1370" -> where? which war?
5. "shared some of the same retainers.[8][clarification needed]" -> resolve the tag
6. "At the Good Parliament in 1367 Suffolk" -> I believe the date is incorrect
7. "discuss the parliament's grievances concerning Gaunt" -> a couple of words what those grievances were
8. Move info about his 2 marriages to earlier sections - it does not really belong to "death" section
9. "Net worth c. £2–3,000 p.a." -> ref needed

Overall, good job. Renata (talk) 10:51, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Pardon my tardiness, and thanks for your patience. This is what I've done to address your issues:

1. This is actually consistent: I use William up until his succession in 1369 (to avoid confusion with his father) and Suffolk thereafter.
2. I don't think much biographical information survives on his brothers, but I added the name of the oldest one.
3. Done
4. Expanded
5. I added a short explanation, I hope this is enough.
6. Silly mistake, good catch!
7. Done
8. Ok, I've moved the marriages up but maintained some information about the dispersal of the estates at the bottom, and renamed the section "Death and dispersal of estates".
9. Done

Hope this helps, let me know if there is anything else. Lampman (talk) 03:12, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

All good. I like what you did to marriages. They explain about his life, don't they? Thanks! Renata (talk) 03:34, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I actually did an extensive rewrite based on your suggestions, and I think it's a better article now. Lampman (talk) 10:30, 15 July 2010 (UTC)