Talk:Angevin kings of England/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Sotakeit (talk · contribs) 08:26, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Comments by Sotakeit

Generally, it is well written and complies 'with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation'. However, there are several glaring grammar iissues throughout, mainly to do with comma use (see here): * The line When the male line of Ingelger became extinct in 1060 cognatic descent continued in 'Origins' section - I would suggest a comma after '1060' to separate the two clauses.
 * The line Territorial ambitions to expand the Angevin holdings prompted power struggles with neighbouring provinces such as Normandy and Brittany leading to influence extending into Maine and Touraine in 'Origins' section - Again, I would suggest a comma between 'Brittany' and 'leading'.
 * The line Matilda's father Henry I of England named her as heir to his large holdings in what are now France and England. in the 'Angevin arrival in England' section - I would suggest commas either side of Henry I of England, as has been done in the previous section (Fulk married his son and heir, Geoffrey, to Henry's daughter and only surviving).
 * Henry saw an opportunity to re-establish what he saw as his rights over the Church in England by reasserting the privileges held by Henry I when Theobald, Archbishop of Canterbury, died, by appointing his friend, Thomas Becket to the post - There could be confusion because of the wording here as to whether the friend was Henry II's or Henry I's. I would suggest rewording to When Theobald, Archbishop of Canterbury died, by appointing his friend, Thomas Becket, to the post, Henry II saw an opportunity to re-establish what he saw as his rights over the church, as held by Henry I.
 * When Dermot died in 1171 Strongbow, as his son-in-law, seized significant territory. This line needs a comma after 1171.
 * Richard the Duchy of Aquitaine; Geoffrey Brittany - There needs to be commas after both Richard and Geoffrey, as at the moment it looks like they are Aquitaine and Brittany.
 * Richard and Philip II of France took advantage of a sickening Henry II with more success - I understand what is meant by 'sickening' here, but I would use 'sickly' or add a clause such as '...advantage of Henry II, whose health was worsening, with more success...'.
 * The line Quickly putting the affairs of the Angevin Empire in order he departed on Crusade to the Middle East in early 1190. in the section 'Angevin decline' - Again, a comma after Empire.

I think the content is broad in its coverage, whilst staying on point. However, there are points where I think some explanation would be useful:
 * 'Custody was passed to Henry the Lion and a tax of 25% of movables and income was required to pay the ransom of 100,000 marks, with a promise of 50,000 more.' - A tax on whom?
 * 'When Arthur's forces threatened his mother, John won a significant victory, capturing the entire rebel leadership at the Battle of Mirebeau.' - Whose mother? John's or Arthur's


 * In the 'Historiography' section, there are several phrases such as 'He was a bad king' and he was no Englishman' that have no place here unless caveated with 'Some think...' etc., and then followed by a relevant reference.

It generally seems well referenced, with a good range of sources used. I would raise a couple of small issues:
 * The whole second paragraph of the 'Angevin decline' section has only one reference, but makes several seemingly separate points. More references need to be added, especially after 'But, on his return to England, Richard forgave John and re-established his control.'.
 * What is reference number 81 meant to be referencing? The whole section? If so, I think that this is unnecessary and should be attached to the actual points in the section rather than the whole.
 * I think 'Current head: Extinct' in the infobox needs a reference.

On the whole, besides the minor grammar points, there don't seem to be a great deal of issues and they can certainly be easily fixed. I would give conditional support if these changes are met. Sotakeit (talk) 08:26, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


 * * I have looked at the Grammer points and think I have covered all of them. What do you think? Will look at the references in that paragraph tomorrow - thx Norfolkbigfish (talk) 12:16, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Great. Very interesting article - especially the Legacy section. Once the referencing points have been looked at I'd be happy to give my full support. Sotakeit (talk) 12:23, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


 * ** I think I've covered the ref questions, what do you think? Norfolkbigfish (talk) 09:11, 25 June

2014 (UTC)


 * Looking good. Great article. Well referenced. Well written. Broad in its coverage. Well illustrated. Support. Sotakeit (talk) 09:38, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Can this now be passed? Thanks....Norfolkbigfish (talk) 08:43, 26 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Sorry! :p pass. All updated, just waiting for the bot to get around to updating the article page. Sotakeit (talk) 08:58, 26 June 2014 (UTC)