Talk:Hugh Bardulf/GA1

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

Reviewer: hamiltonstone (talk) 03:50, 13 August 2010 (UTC) As usual, this article is neutral, stable, well written and referenced. Specific comments: Otherwise excellent. Will keep an eye out. hamiltonstone (talk) 03:50, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Under early life: "Hugh acquired land at Waddington,..." which Hugh? The father I assume - isn't the 1140s a little early to be acquiring land for someone who dies c. 1203?
 * No, it's the younger, according to Keats-Rohan. He was a elderly man when he died, and if he acquired the land as a teenager (or possibly younger) it's easily believable. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:23, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "Bardulf was a royal justice almost annually". This passage may be too hard to explain more fully, but I thought I'd mention that my reaction to this was along the lines of 'huh? aren't judges are appointed permanently?'. That left me unsure what a royal justice was.
 * At this time, justices weren't appointed for life. They were sent out on rounds and each time a group was sent out ... the appointments were made again, and might or might not include those appointed before. I think Ironholds is planning on writing an article on royal justices in this time frame, and he's much better suited to the intricacies of the situation. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:23, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "along with the Philip of Poitou..." - is that a surplus "the"?
 * fixed. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:23, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "when Bardulf was known to be dead" - I know what is meant, but it's an odd turn of phrase - any chance of expanding it slightly to something like "when records show Bardulf had died", or something? Not sure myself.
 * Changed to "when records show that Bardulf was known to be deceased." Ealdgyth - Talk 13:23, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "He remained on such good terms with Hubert Walter, that when Walter..." and thereafter: I just didn't follow this. Maybe I wasn't reading the article carefully enough to that point, but this passage didn't make sense. To clarify: the written text is grammatically clear, I just didn't get the point. Why would one need to be on especially good terms, or why was this remarkable?
 * It's one of those "bon mots" that's known in the medieval history field, a phrase that's memorable. I've expanded a bit, and hopefully it is clearer that it was Bardulf teasing Walter. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:23, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Ealdgyth, all good. hamiltonstone (talk) 22:37, 13 August 2010 (UTC)