Talk:Weapons and armour in Anglo-Saxon England

Further reading section
I don't want dive in and start editing an article when it's in the process of GA review, but would someone with a particular interest in this article care to note that the first item in the 'Further reading' section is wrongly referenced?

"Bone, Peter (1989). Development of Anglo-Saxon Swords from the Fifth to the Eleventh Century. Oxford: Oxford University Committee for Archaeology Monograph" - is not a book or monograph - it's a paper with that title contained in the volume edited by Sonia Chadwick Hawkes Weapons and Warfare in Anglo-Saxon England that is referred to in notes 61 and 62 (it's on pp 63 to 70 of that volume) - and by the way, her name was "Hawkes", not "Hawke" as in the notes.

John O&#39;London (talk) 09:16, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Explaining my move
I have boldly moved this page from "Anglo-Saxon weaponry" to "Weaponry in Anglo-Saxon England". I believe that this new title more accurately reflects the scope of the article. It exclusively covers the period of Anglo-Saxon England (the article introduction even says that "different weapons were created and used in Anglo-Saxon England ..." [emphasis mine]), as opposed to the broader timescale of the Anglo-Saxon people. Accordingly, I changed the title for clarity. Other articles on Anglo-Saxon topics have this format; see Coinage in Anglo-Saxon England and Burial in Anglo-Saxon England. If this move is contested, I will start an RM. Biblio (talk) 18:17, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hmm - Anglo-Saxon people are those who lived in the Anglo-Saxon period. There is no other definition. The move will not help searches and was probably a bad idea. Johnbod (talk) 17:54, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The Anglo-Saxon people existed across a larger timespan than the period of Anglo-Saxon England. They originated in Germany, and continued to exist as a people even after the Normans conquered England. That is why there are currently two separate articles for Anglo-Saxons and History of Anglo-Saxon England. Biblio (talk) 17:53, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * No, this is bullshit. The term should not be used outside the Anglo-Saxon period (except for 60 years or so after), although Americans tend to do so, and the Victorians did. Read the articles! Do a RM please. Johnbod (talk) 09:52, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm inclined to agree with Johnbod on this one. I can't recall seeing academics talk about Anglo-Saxons other than in the context of the period of Anglo-Saxon England, except in terms of migration into England at the very start of that period (when the various tribes that became Anglo-Saxons began to come across, so it is useful to talk about the earlier German context), or in the transition phase at the end of the period (when it is useful to distinguish Anglo-Saxon culture from the Norman culture for a few years). We do have separate Anglo-Saxons and History of Anglo-Saxon England articles, but the former covers the broader topic of Anglo-Saxons (including culture etc.), the latter only the historical events. Hchc2009 (talk) 11:11, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 22 July 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Weapons and armour in Anglo-Saxon England. Consensus below shows that "wargear" is too uncommon. There seems to be a slightly greater consensus for "Weapons and armour" rather than "Arms and armour", particularly considering the article Weapons and armor in Chinese mythology, legend, cultural symbology, and fiction exists.. estar8806 (talk) ★ 15:36, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Weaponry in Anglo-Saxon England → Wargear in Anglo-Saxon England – This page currently covers both weaponry and armour. It would be more fitting and accurate to use a term that covers both these topics and "Wargear" seems suitable. Ingwina (talk) 19:28, 22 July 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Adumbrativus (talk) 02:57, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose as "wargear" seems to be a very uncommon term, as I can't find any online dictionaries that actually list it as a word. The current title honestly seems fine to me, as dictionaries define "weaponry" as "arms and armour". Rreagan007 (talk) 21:21, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Okay yep that's a fair point about "wargear", perhaps that's just my dialect speaking - it does seem to be a bit rare. Perhaps Weapons and armour in Anglo-Saxon England would be better like in Weapons and armor in Chinese mythology, legend, cultural symbology, and fiction. I stand by the fact though that most dictionaries don't include "armour" in "weaponry", using it instead just as a collective for "weapons" (see these for examples ) Ingwina (talk) 07:06, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Support Weapons and armour in Anglo-Saxon England or Arms and armour in Anglo-Saxon England per above. I would dispute that "weaponry" commonly refers to armour as well, whatever dictionaries may say (and the OED, incidentally, does not). -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:06, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose nom, per Rreagan. Support Arms and armour in Anglo-Saxon England (best), or the other suggestion. Johnbod (talk) 15:36, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.