Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Capture of Wakefield/archive1

Capture of Wakefield

 * Nominator(s): Harrias  talk 10:51, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

The capture of Wakefield, in Yorkshire, featured two of the more prominent commanders from the First English Civil War. Sir Thomas Fairfax, after nearly getting himself captured in this engagement, went on to become the commander-in-chief of parliament's New Model Army which effectively won the war. George Goring was taken prisoner at Wakefield, had some success at Marston Moor, but ultimately failed in southwest England, and escaped to France claiming ill-health. The capture of Wakefield itself was significant for the scale of the victory, and the number of prisoners Fairfax was able to take, but territoriality was of little consequence.

The article underwent a GAN in September, and then a MILHIST A-class review in October. As always, all feedback will be gratefully received; I feel like I've been through it with a fine-tooth comb, but I have no doubt that I will soon discover that comb has some glaring holes in it! Harrias talk 10:51, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Comments Support from PM
I looked this over in detail at Milhist ACR so just have a couple of comments: That's all I have. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:24, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Market Place→marketplace, as it is such a generic term and we know what town it is in, so even if Market Place, Wakefield was ever a proper place name, Market Place seems incongruous here
 * Done. Harrias  talk 11:59, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I am still left wondering about what more scholarly texts on the Civil War say about this event. There are a few Pen & Sword titles, but not the weightier references I would expect to be referred to, even if their mentions of this event are in passing. Gaunt's The English Civil War: A Military History briefly mentions the capture on pages 127–128, and Wanklyn and Jones' A Military History of the English Civil War: 1642-1649 seems to mention Wakefield a couple of times, although the preview I can access doesn't make it clear if there is anything on this event.
 * The mentions in Wanklyn and Jones aren't related to this engagement. I don't have access to Gaunt at the moment, but I should before this review closes. Harrias  talk 11:59, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
 * No worries, even if Gaunt has similar information as that already in the article, it is worth citing him by way of showing you have looked at all the literature, including the general military histories of the war. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:48, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Cheers . Harrias  talk 11:59, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
 * As I am away until the 18th, I'm AGF that Gaunt will be examined and cited, and so am supporting on that basis. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:19, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Image review


 * File:George_Goring,_Baron_Goring_after_Sir_Anthony_Van_Dyck.jpg needs a US PD tag. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:07, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Added, thanks . Harrias  talk 10:36, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Support from Tim riley
I have enjoyed reviewing this article. It is short, sharp and doesn't mess about. A few very minor points: Nothing there to prevent my support for the elevation of this excellent article. It seems to me comprehensive, and is well and widely sourced, a splendid read, and nicely illustrated. Meets all the FA criteria in my view.  Tim riley  talk   19:12, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
 * As Leeds has a link you might perhaps link Nottingham too.
 * Added. Harrias  talk 10:38, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * You tell us twice that Sir Thomas was Lord Fairfax's son. Once is enough, I think.
 * Trimmed. Harrias  talk 10:38, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * "in order to capture sufficient men" – there are those (of whom I am not one) who boggle at "in order to", insisting that a simple "to" will suffice. I don't feel strongly on the matter, but just mention it.
 * I've left it for the moment. Harrias  talk 10:38, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * "an exchange was set-up" – you don't want the hyphen here.
 * Thanks, fixed. Harrias  talk 10:38, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your kind words Tim. Harrias  talk 10:38, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Support from Gog the Mild
I assessed this at GAN and it seemed pretty good then.

I have made some minor copy edits which you will want to check.


 * The first sentence gets a bit busy. If you don't wish to split it, could I suggest '... of Wakefield, Yorkshire, which was commanded by George Goring, and ...'? (It is easy to gather that "Wakefield" was the Royalist commander on a first reading.)
 * Blimey, that 'sentence' sure was doing a lot of work. Reworked completely, how's that? Harrias  talk 14:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * It now says over 1,400, while the article says roughly.
 * Good catch, aligned both as "roughly". Harrias  talk 15:23, 18 November 2019 (UTC)


 * "After being defeated at Seacroft Moor, around 800 Parliamentarians had been taken prisoner" It is not clear from the first clause just who was defeated; one has to work it out from the second. Perhaps 'Around 800 Parliamentarians had been taken prisoner, after being defeated at Seacroft Moor' or similar?
 * Reordered as suggested. Harrias  talk 14:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Optional: break this sentence after "prisoner". (Ie, start the next with "Fairfax".)
 * I actually think with it swapped around, it flows quite nicely now. Harrias  talk 14:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * "split it into two to attack from different directions" I am not sure about this, but should that be 'split it in two'?
 * It certainly sounds better than the awkward repetition of 'to two'. Harrias  talk 14:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Optional: the date may fit better immediately before "He marched his force"
 * My only reason for avoiding this, is that the date there would be 20 May, whereas I preferred to use the date of the battle, 21 May. Harrias  talk 14:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * You are quite right.


 * Optional: break the last sentence of the lead.
 * Split, but clarified. Harrias  talk 14:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * "and declared the Earl of Essex, and by extension Parliament, traitors" Perhaps 'to be traitors'?
 * Yes, that's better. Harrias  talk 14:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Link "gentry".
 * Linked. Harrias  talk 14:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * "South Yorkshire" I am not sure about the upper case S.
 * I think either is fine, but it's no big deal. Changed. Harrias  talk 14:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * "described that during a game of bowls" The convention is to write 'describes'.
 * Changed, because you're right, but it doesn't make any sense to me, because we used "said" rather than "says". Harrias  talk 14:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Me neither.


 * Is it known who had command of the "three troops of dragoons" during the attack?
 * No. Harrias  talk 14:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Footnote. Consider "every" → 'each'.
 * Yes, that's better. Harrias  talk 14:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * "was defeated on Aldwalton Moor on 30 June 1643" "on" twice in 4 words. Possibly make the first 'at'?
 * Sure. Harrias  talk 14:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * "The castle was twice besieged in 1645, surrendering to the Parliamentarians in October 1645" Delete the second "1645".
 * Done. Harrias  talk 14:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Splendid stuff. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:58, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, as always, for your insights: I've responded to each point above, mostly in agreement. Harrias  talk 14:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Always a pleasure to review such fine quality articles. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:57, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Sources review
Links all working, formats are consistent and MoS-compliant. In the main, sources appear to be appropriately scholarly and to meet the standards required by the FAC criteria, but I do wonder about the Rochford book. Its blurb via the google link reads: "The escaping bear who'd had enough of being a Victorian showpiece; tragedy narrowly averted over the skies of Wakefield when an aeronaut lost control of his balloon in 1827; secret passages and hidden relics; and dark tales of determined apparitions and boggarts are among many enchanting stories told within the pages of Wakefield Then & Now: Extraordinary Tales from the Merrie City. In this fascinating book about his home city, Michael J. Rochford has gathered dozens of intriguing accounts from the annals of Wakefield folklore..." etc. Sounds fascinating and entertaining, but is this objective history? Brianboulton (talk) 20:01, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I can't really put forward an argument against that! Thankfully it isn't doing too much heavy lifting, and I've definitely come across the party in other sources, just without such a delicious quote! I'll have a look around and come back to you, thanks. Harrias  talk 20:53, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I have replaced Rochford in both places it appeared. Harrias  talk 10:58, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Comments Support by CPA-5

 * The capture of Wakefield occurred during the First English Civil War So the "Capture of Wakefield" is not a proper noun?
 * Style guides vary, but I note that ours does prefer capitals. Changed. Harrias  talk 10:31, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Were they really 3,000 troops and not circa?
 * Fixed. Harrias  talk 10:31, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * compared to the 3,000 led by George Goring in Wakefield Add Lord here as his title or wasn't he a lord at the moment?
 * He didn't become Lord Goring until November 1644. Harrias  talk 10:31, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * been defeated by George Goring at the battle of Seacroft Moor Maybe add "Lord of ..."
 * Hmmm? I don't know what you're getting at here? Harrias  talk 10:31, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * This was meant if he was a Lord but he wasn't until 1644.

That's anything from me. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 09:50, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * clear enough room for the cavalry to break through Merge break through?
 * My belief is that "breakthrough" is the noun, and "break through" is the verb. Harrias  talk 10:31, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * at the battle of Seacroft Moor on 30 March 1643 Not a proper noun?
 * Changed. Harrias  talk 10:31, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your review; each point has been addressed. Harrias  talk 10:31, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 11:12, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Comments support by Pendright
Lede:
 * Around 800 Parliamentarians ...
 * Why isn't it - Around 800 of the ...?
 * Because that would suggest it was a subset of a group we already knew about, which it isn't. Harrias  talk 07:38, 1 December 2019 (UTC)


 * He marched his force from Leeds, and split it in two to attack from different directions. After around two hours of fighting early in the morning of 21 May 1643, Fairfax broke through into the town.
 * Info box says leads is a city as does the Leads link?
 * He broke through into Wakefield, which was a town at the time. Harrias  talk 07:38, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

State of war in Yoorkshire:
 * ... Ferdinando Fairfax, 2nd Lord Fairfax of Cameron, was appointed as [the] commander of [the] parliament's forces in Yorkshire.
 * Add [the]
 * Added the first, but not the second, where it isn't required. Harrias  talk 07:38, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Battle:
 * After an evening march on 20 May 1643, [the] Parliamentarian forces from Bradford, ...
 * Add [the]
 * I'm worried that adding "the" here might imply that it was all of the Parliamentarian forces that were in Bradford, Leeds and Halifax, which would be misleading. Harrias  talk 07:38, 1 December 2019 (UTC)


 * As they were only the width of the road, this evened the battle, ...
 * No road has been mentioned previously, so would it not be 'a' road?
 * No, because they were specifically the width of this road, so it requires the definite article. Harrias  talk 07:38, 1 December 2019 (UTC)


 * The defenders had been alerted to the enemy approach by the cavalry which had fled from ...
 * That, not which, is used when the information is essential to the meaning of the sentence.
 * Changed. Harrias  talk 07:38, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Aftermath:
 * ...claiming that their victory was the "work of God", while ...
 * Should'nt the "work of God" be in italics?
 * It doesn't seem to fall into any of the reasons laid out in MOS:ITALICS, so I don't think so? Harrias  talk 07:38, 1 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Accordingly, [the] parliament declared 28 May a day of thanksgiving for the victory.
 * Add [the]
 * I disagree. Harrias  talk 07:38, 1 December 2019 (UTC)


 * ... most of the north of England had been captured by [the] Parliamentarian forces.
 * Add [the]
 * Again, this seems unnecessary to me. Harrias  talk 07:38, 1 December 2019 (UTC)


 * The following year Fairfax was appointed as [the] commander-in-chief of [the] parliament's forces, ...
 * Add [the]
 * Again, added the first, not the second. Harrias  talk 07:38, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Finished - Pendright (talk) 04:01, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your review. All points addressed above. Harrias  talk 07:38, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * All comments addressed - supporting. Pendright (talk) 19:27, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 14:05, 25 December 2019 (UTC)