Talk:Seaxburh of Ely/GA1

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

Reviewer: Hchc2009 (talk · contribs) 16:38, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Some comments below - an interesting article, with just some work needed to unpack and explain a couple of the points in the text.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:12, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

1. Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct;

A few bits need a bit of work:


 * "the daughter of an Anglo-Saxon king, the queen of Eorcenberht of Kent, an abbess and a saint of the Christian Church." I'd lose the first bit about her being a daughter for two reasons. Firstly, her notability can't depend on her parents; secondly, it means that the second bit - the queen aspect - can be misread as being a reference to her mother (the first time I read this I thought she was the daughter of a king and Queen Eorcenberht).
 * done. Hel-hama (talk) 16:46, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "the queen of Eorcenberht of Kent" - could this be "the queen of King Eorcenberht of Kent"? It would make it clearer what/who Eorcenberht is without having to click on the link.
 * done. Hel-hama (talk) 16:46, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "the translation of the Æthelthryth's remains" - this is grammatically correct, but is there any other option than "translation"? It's just that it's a little bit obscure, and some readers would have to look it up.
 * done. Hel-hama (talk) 16:46, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "sarcophagus" - worth linking.
 * done. Hel-hama (talk) 16:46, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "her body was discovered to be miraculously uncorrupted" - "was said to have been discovered..."? "was recorded as being miraculously preserved"? I think we need to make clear here that this is the chroniclers speaking.
 * done. Hel-hama (talk) 16:46, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "one of the saintly daughters" - unclear from context if "saintly" is being used to refer to their piety, or that they were all saints.
 * done. Hel-hama (talk) 16:46, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "by her marriage to Eorcenberht, king of Kent from 640 to 644, and the great-uncle of Mildburh and her saintly sisters" - the second bit confused me. Was Eorcenberht Seaxburh's great-uncle? Who's Mildburh? I also wasn't clear whether these sisters were Mildburh's sisters, or Seaxburh's.
 * done. Hel-hama (talk) 21:14, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "within the annal for 640, "Then..." I'd advise you either go for a colon, e.g. "within the annal for 640: "Then..."", or just turn the capital "T" into a lower case, "within the annal for 640, "then..."" - either would be acceptable in terms of the MOS I think.
 * done. Hel-hama (talk) 21:01, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "Seaxburh and Eorcenberht had a second saintly daughter" - again, unclear if saintly means pious, or that she was later canonised.
 * clarified. Hel-hama (talk) 20:55, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "Seaxburh's marriage was itself of seminal importance in the establishment of monastic life for women during the Anglo-Saxon period." - I didn't understand why the marriage was itself of seminal importance (I can see that as queen she helped the establishment, but this suggested the marriage itself made a difference).
 * sentence expanded. Hel-hama (talk) 20:49, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "She perhaps played" - why "perhaps"? You say that she was regent, which sounds like it was pretty certain.
 * agreed. Hel-hama (talk) 20:29, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "hagiographer" - worth linking.
 * done. Hel-hama (talk) 20:27, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * " she hastened from a well-timed widowhood to that of the life devoted to God" - this reads strangely. If it's a quote, it needs speech marks; if not, I'd reword it a bit.
 * quote added. Hel-hama (talk) 20:22, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "According to Yorke, Seaxburh's retirement to Ely is an example of use of the Anglo-Saxon code-law, whereby a married woman remained the responsibility of the paternal side of her family" - This needs explaining a bit more.
 * done, I may perhaps add more. Hel-hama (talk)


 * "Sims-Williams" - who is Sims-Williams? Also, do they have a first name like Barbara Yorke?
 * done Hel-hama (talk) 19:45, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "John Crook notes that "the miraculous discovery of a suitable coffin is, however, a hagiographic commonplace" - again, worth explaining who Crook it; it might be worth explaining what a hagiographic commonplace is for the casual reader.
 * done. Hel-hama (talk) 18:55, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "Seaxburh apparently managed the translation of her sister's remains" - this could mean "managed" as in "carried out", or "managed" as in "coped with" - unclear which meaning is being used.
 * confusion removed. Hel-hama (talk) 17:46, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "Bede fails to emphasise the matrilinear succession established there by Æthelthryth..." why "fails"?
 * amendment made. Hel-hama (talk) 18:27, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "Seaxburh formed part of the Kentish Royal Legend (also called Þá hálgan), whose subjects were unified by their holiness and royal connections and which Pauline Stafford notes "may have been a Christian alternative to pagan geneaology". The legend was of relevance to the rulers of 10th and 11th century England, as it described an earlier amalgation of royal sanctity. " - I really didn't understand this bit I'm afraid - could you expand perhaps?
 * done. Hel-hama (talk) 18:15, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * "lists several Lives of the saint" - you'll need to explain what a "Life" is here.
 * done. Hel-hama (talk) 17:56, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
 * Yes.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:10, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

2. Factually accurate and verifiable:

(a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout;


 * Generally fine. There's a few minor points with the bibliography:
 * Bertram Colgrave, R. A. B. Mynors lacks an ISBN number
 * done. Hel-hama (talk) 17:43, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Some books have location and publisher, some just publisher - you'll need to be consistent.
 * done. Hel-hama (talk) 17:35, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The older books could be given an OCLC number - let me know if you don't know how to do this, and I can advise.
 * Click on here and enter the terms - it should pull up some options. You can then add the OCLC number into the article using the following template: . This is a unique number that should be recognised by libraries around the world.Hchc2009 (talk) 18:30, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * done for Earle (19th century) Hel-hama (talk) 16:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't know why the Handbook of British Chronology is given a page number in the bibliography.Hchc2009 (talk) 16:45, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
 * done. Hel-hama (talk) 16:46, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * fn 19 lacks a full stop.
 * done. Hel-hama (talk) 16:46, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * fn 30 should presumably be pp.57-58 to be consistent with the others.Hchc2009 (talk) 16:46, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
 * done. Hel-hama (talk) 16:46, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

(b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines;

(c) it contains no original research.
 * None found.Hchc2009 (talk) 16:45, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;


 * Yes.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:12, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).


 * Yes.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:12, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.


 * Neutral.Hchc2009 (talk) 16:39, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.


 * Stable.Hchc2009 (talk) 16:39, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Illustrated, if possible, by images:

(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;


 * Yes.Hchc2009 (talk) 16:39, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.


 * Yes.Hchc2009 (talk) 16:39, 8 October 2011 (UTC)