Talk:Siege of Steenwijk (1580–1581)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 23:03, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

I'll get to this shortly.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:03, 13 December 2013 (UTC)


 * No DABs and external links are good.
 * No issues with image.
 * In the lede link Steenwijk and explain "States" better. It's not obvious to what you're referring. Perhaps "Dutch" or "Dutch States"
 * Done - changed to Dutch rebels in article.
 * An English and States force under John Norreys successfully relieved the town and the Spanish subsequently lifted the siege in February leaving the Dutch and English victorious. Say when the relievers got through and that ill-health and lack of supplies forced the Spanish to lift the siege. Delete the last bit about being victorious.
 * Done - An English and Dutch rebel force under John Norreys successfully relieved the town on January 24 and the Spanish in addition to ill-health and lack of supplies subsequently lifted the siege in February.
 * From March 1577 the Spanish had bought a contingent of soldiers from Wallonia to maintain their rule. The tenses here don't work. Try "The Spanish brought a contingent from Wallonia (to where) in March 1577 to maintain their rule}}
 * Rephrase this as it doesn't make sense: The States of Overijssel however knew that payment of wages was overdue as a result this occupation force in March 1580 chose the side of the insurgents, despite the offers and pleas from the Count of Renneberg.
 * changed background start - The Spanish in March 1577 had bought a contingent of soldiers from Wallonia to maintain their rule in the rebellious province of Overijssel. This occupation force in March 1580 chose the side of the Dutch rebels partly due to payment of wages being overdue and the increase of support amongst the outraged Protestant Dutch over the betrayal of George Van Lalaing (Count of Renneberg and former Stadholder of Groningen) who had turned to be in the service of Spain. This makes sense now.
 * And this: The Overijssel States had ensured the presence of a company of soldiers led by Captain Olthof. In October, a second company led by Johan van den Kornput arrived at Steenwijk. Van den Berg in 1578 being ahead of Kornput had yet to still provide assistance to the siege of Deventer, after which the city could be forced to surrender and came into States' hands. Among other things, who's Van den Berg?
 * Lost in Dutch translation - now looks better - The province of Overijssel only had a small number of Dutch rebel troops; a company of soldiers led by Captain Olthof, but in October a second company led by Johan van den Kornput consisting of 600 soldiers arrived at Steenwijk to boost numbers in the area. In 1578 Kornput had provided vital strategic assistance to Lalaing (before his betrayal) during the siege of Deventer, subsequently the city was forced to surrender and came into States hands. Took out Van Den Berg as irrelevant.
 * Lalang or Lalaing?
 * Now Lalaing.
 * I think that you mean infantry and cavalry here: 6,000 soldiers and another 1200 riders
 * Indeed - infantry & cavalry
 * What's the point here? The inhabitants of Steenwijk could not use the crop fields because they were too dry and the water in the rivers were too low.
 * too much info here, so chopped it to make it relevant - who already had a poor harvest before the siege.
 * More later.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:05, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll give the editor until 6 January to respond or I'll fail this nom.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:14, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hope this helps. Please inform me of more changes that need to be made. Regards ChrisWet (talk) 23:02, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

These are improvements, but I think that many more issues remain regarding phrasing, etc. I recommend contacting the Guild of Copyeditors, particularly Diannaa, and see if they can have somebody copy-edit the article. I'll be happy to resume reviewing it once it's been copyedited.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:18, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for this. I will take note of said person for copy-editing. ChrisWet (talk) 19:15, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Where are we on this?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:13, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry, forgot about this and have put in a request at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests, hope this helps. ChrisWet (talk) 22:02, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
 * This is taking too long and I'm going to fail it. When the GOCE copyedit is done, renominate it and ping me and I'll expedite the review so it doesn't spent months in the queue.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:02, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * No problem the copy editors seems to have a huge backlog, but thanks anyway. ChrisWet (talk) 13:29, 12 February 2014 (UTC)