Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hensley Henson/archive1

Hensley Henson

 * Nominator(s):  Tim riley  talk   12:37, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

This article is about an English bishop who was not averse to ecclesiastical fisticuffs. I'm not sure how comfortable he would have been to know personally, but I have much enjoyed reading about him and writing him up here. I have a particular soft spot for the article as ten years ago it was informally reviewed by the late and still painfully missed Brian Boulton and shortly after that was reviewed for GAN by one of our leading lights on church history, Ealdgyth. I've added to it since then, and I look forward to comments from anyone kind enough to look in.  Tim riley  talk   12:37, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Pickersgill-Cunliffe

 * What a pleasingly alliterative name!
 * Indeed! Infectious. I found myself writing on my talk page, seeking reviewers, "belligerent bishop ... combative creature".  Tim riley  talk   15:05, 14 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Bishop of Hereford is a duplicated link in the lede
 * The MoS, I understand, no longer regards duplicate links as mortal sins, and – without feeling adamant about it – I think the duplication is possibly helpful here.  Tim riley  talk   15:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)


 * As you don't begin the article with his full name, both Herbert and Hensley are technically unreferenced!!
 * I suppose so. Done.  Tim riley  talk   15:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Link Anglican on first mention
 * No strong objection, but we've linked Anglican and C of E already, and I'm not sure another link would be helpful.  Tim riley  talk   15:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)


 * "Henson undertook their functions himself." which Henson are we referring to here?
 * Hensley. Renounced the devil and all his works on his own behalf. Clarified.  Tim riley  talk   15:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)


 * "akin to that of an alien" are we able to say why this was the case?
 * Not specifically – he just wasn't part of college life in the usual way, I think.  Tim riley  talk   15:05, 14 July 2024 (UTC)


 * "his research es "?
 * I think so, yes.  Tim riley  talk   15:05, 14 July 2024 (UTC)


 * "October 1885" repeated year
 * True. Not needed and now gone.  Tim riley  talk   15:05, 14 July 2024 (UTC)


 * "after being ordained deacon" my religious knowledge is very poor, but I was under the impression that one would be ordained a deacon of a particular church/diocese. Is this the case here?
 * No. An ordinary C of E deacon is a deacon anywhere in the C of E. It's like a lance-vicar, as it were. (I think there are other kinds of deacons, more specialised, but HH wasn't one such.)   Tim riley  talk   15:05, 14 July 2024 (UTC)


 * What's Salisbury's original connection to Henson? His patronage seems to come out of nowhere!
 * Salisbury was associated in a lay capacity with St Margaret's, Barking, but I think it would be going into rather too much detail to expand on this, though I'm willing to negotiate.  Tim riley  talk   15:05, 14 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Westminster Abbey is a duplicated link
 * Freemason and Freemasonry is the same link
 * Indeed, to both but as I say above we are now, I believe, permitted duplicate links where we think them helpful to our readers. I think these are OK.  Tim riley  talk   15:05, 14 July 2024 (UTC)


 * "Chadwick writes that it was said of Henson"
 * Gosh, yes! Thank you!  Tim riley  talk   15:05, 14 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Paragraph ending "Few of his colleagues agreed with him, even those dismayed by the parliamentary vote." is uncited
 * Very good point. Now attended to.  Tim riley  talk   15:05, 14 July 2024 (UTC)


 * "Henson retired from Durham"
 * There is no requirement, as far as I can see, in the MoS to use a name at first mention in any para. The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography does, in fact, pretty much do so in its article on Henson, but doesn't do so systematically for other subjects, and personally I like to keep the surnames under control and use pronouns whenever they convey the intended meaning.

That's all I have for now. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 14:16, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Some smashing points there – thank you so much, Pickersgill-Cunliffe!  Tim riley  talk   15:05, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Image review
 * File:Hensley-Henson-Vanity-Fair.jpg needs an author date of death. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:38, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Good old Commons – you can rely on it to let you down! Image replaced locally on En-Wiki with due data. Thank you, as always, Nikkimaria!  Tim riley  talk   15:59, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Support from MSincccc
Placeholder for now. MSincccc (talk) 17:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Lead
 * Not sure the sources justify "often".  Tim riley  talk   08:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * We need commas on both sides of the subordinate clause.  Tim riley  talk   08:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Dropped the comma before "and".
 * No objection to this. Done.  Tim riley  talk   08:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Can these two sentences be strategically combined for a more concise sentence?
 * In my view it would be cumbersome to attempt to cram three things HH campaigned against and three things he campaigned for into a single sentence. Would you care to suggest a form of words?  Tim riley  talk   08:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Tim riley You can use this- MSincccc (talk) 10:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * But that would not be true. He did the six different things at different times, not simultaneously as your wording says. I don't in any case think replacing two sentences of 17 and 19 words with a single long one of 33 words does the reader any favours.  Tim riley  talk   10:45, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Tim riley You can use this- MSincccc (talk) 10:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * But that would not be true. He did the six different things at different times, not simultaneously as your wording says. I don't in any case think replacing two sentences of 17 and 19 words with a single long one of 33 words does the reader any favours.  Tim riley  talk   10:45, 15 July 2024 (UTC)


 * MSincccc (talk) 17:59, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Life and career
 * Provides for a smoother flow given that we know who his father and mother were from the previous lines.
 * In my view that is an inferior wording. It is no shorter and gratuitously introduces "whereas" and "however", two words better eschewed as a rule.  Tim riley  talk   11:14, 15 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Dropped the "a" before "school".
 * Looks all right to me.  Tim riley  talk   11:14, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Tim riley Last years
 * Could the sub-section heading be changed to Final years?
 * If you glance at the OED you will see that it defines "last" as "finally". The suggested change of preposition seems to me most peculiar.  Tim riley  talk   09:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Tim riley That's fine. Even I prefer Last years in this case. What about the suggestion above it? That one seems fine as it provides a smoother flow (mentioning the date before the place). MSincccc (talk) 09:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I think it is better as it is, and as I have said above, your suggested change of preposition seems to me most peculiar.  Tim riley  talk   09:31, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Tim riley I would like to know the reason for you finding my suggested sentence peculiar. Even this sentence could be rephrased as- Looking forward to your response. MSincccc (talk) 09:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I referred to your suggestion of changing "at his wish" to "under his wish". The second preposition seems to me very odd, and the first perfectly natural.  Tim riley  talk   11:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Tim riley Most articles in British English, including FACs like that of Liz Truss, Elizabeth II and others, mention the birth date prior to the place of birth under their respective early life sections. Looking forward to your response.
 * There is no prescribed order. Sometimes place is first, sometimes date. Sometimes the date is only in the lead of an FA, sometimes it is in the text.  Tim riley  talk   11:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Tim riley I would not force you to make an edit then. It's fine as it is.
 * By no means. If it ain't broke don't fix it.  Tim riley  talk   15:11, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I would return with other suggestions later. To be honest, the article has been well written. Do you think, @Tim riley, that my comments have been constructive? Looking forward to your response. Regards.
 * I think your suggestions have been well meant, even though I have adopted few of them. If you are seeking to learn about reviewing I recommend studying the contributions of Wehwalt, UndercoverClassicist and other editors here, whose suggestions I have been able, and very pleased, to adopt much more widely: they help clarify, avoid ambiguity, correct inaccuracies, and challenge my interpretation of the sources, rather than putting forward tweaks to prose on the grounds that "I wouldn't phrase it like that".   Tim riley  talk   15:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * It was a great time reading the article, @Tim riley. I have nothing more to add here and eagerly anticipate our future collaborations. Support. MSincccc (talk) 17:22, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * MSincccc (talk) 14:41, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I will let you know of my verdict after I have gone throught the article again. Looking forward to your response. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 07:03, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I will let you know of my verdict after I have gone throught the article again. Looking forward to your response. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 07:03, 17 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Do we need to mention his full name here; will either "Thomas" or "Henson" not do?
 * We discourage the use of forenames alone as too chummy and using the surname alone here would be ambiguous.


 * Till here for the time being. Hopefully, you will find them useful. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 10:47, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Comments by Wehwalt

 * The date of birth is unsourced. Suggest mentioning it in first line of the body of the article.
 * Good point. Done.  Tim riley  talk   16:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * "an annual stipend of £200" While I'm dubious about inflation templates, it might be worth some consideration.
 * I'm dubious too, but have added the template.  Tim riley  talk   16:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Can anything be said of his duties as a Fellow of All Souls? I take it the six-months absence was with their blessing (so to speak) since they appointed him a vicar.
 * I've added a footnote explaining the unusual role of All Souls as a college with no undergraduates.  Tim riley  talk   16:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * "In doing so he addressed many nonconformist gatherings; the historian Owen Chadwick suggests that this may have commended him to David Lloyd George, who became prime minister in 1916." Perhaps a few words as to way this is so.
 * I think the existing footnote serves this function, or do you disagree?  Tim riley  talk   16:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * "Lloyd George told him that he would have preferred to offer him a see with "a large and industrial population", and hoped to transfer him to one such if he succeeded at Hereford.[59]" Consider cutting "such".
 * Good. (You have long had an unerring way of homing in on the bits of my prose I'm not entirely happy with.) Done.  Tim riley  talk   16:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * "coal in the years after the war" War? What war? You haven't mentioned a war. (and is there anything worth saying about his wartime activities?)
 * Oops! Now mentioned and a short para added about his WWI activities.  Tim riley  talk   16:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * " the Head Master of Eton" Headmaster or headmaster or head master or Head Master?
 * That establishment has its own terms, and the principal is indeed the Head Master, as written here.  Tim riley  talk   16:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * "And to which of those epithets does your Grace take exception?" Should "Your" be capped?
 * It should be and now is. Thanks for that.  Tim riley  talk   16:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * During the time of the debates in parliament in the late 1920s, was Henson in the House of Lords as a bishop?
 * The Bishop of Durham was and is one of the three bishops who automatically have a seat in the Lords. (The other two are London and Winchester; the rest have to wait their turn till they get in in order of seniority of their consecration, there being 21 other Lords Spiritual seats but 42 dioceses.) I don't know that Hensley's contributions in the Lords need mention, though.  Tim riley  talk   16:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * That's it. A very interesting read and I noticed some subjects covered by Brian in his articles.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:21, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you, as always, Wehwalt. Brian was much in my thoughts when I worked on the article over the last few weeks.  Tim riley  talk   16:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Support Wehwalt (talk) 18:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

UC
Saving a space. UndercoverClassicist T·C 08:43, 15 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : needs a comma after Oxford per MOS:GEOCOMMA (there are one or two other examples).
 * Right ho, if them's the club rules. Done.  Tim riley  talk   11:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : is this the bit about the right of clergy to express doubts about key points of doctrine? I don't think it's explicitly spelled out in the body that his critics called him a heretic (as opposed to just disagreeing with him, calling him a wimp/wrong 'un or something distinct but equally bad).
 * The charges of heresy began before WWI and got more vehement before his appointment to Hereford. I've added a short para in the Westminster section.  Tim riley  talk   11:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

More to follow. UndercoverClassicist T·C 19:30, 16 July 2024 (UTC)


 * MOS:NEE: the word should be linked on first use -- there's a template for this purpose.
 * Done.  Tim riley  talk   11:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : can we be at all specific about what/whom he was bigoted against? Anglicans? Is there anything in the Plymouth Brethren's doctrine that would point anywhere?
 * I must tread carefully here. Peart-Binns gives no specific examples of Thomas's bigotry but writes,   Tim riley  talk   11:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Could do something with "contempt for the wickedness of the world" and the sense that he considered mainstream schools to be rife with corruption? UndercoverClassicist T·C 18:41, 17 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : similarly, I think it would help here to identify, at least in broad strokes, what the PB believed that was so upsetting -- we have the word "zealous" further up, but plenty of very committed, zealous believers are unquestionably lovely people.
 * I've used some of the above extract to sum up the problems.  Tim riley  talk   11:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : the tone is slipping slightly here, I worry -- a little subjective, a little emotional, a little Dickensian, perhaps. On a more concrete note, isn't "widow of a Lutheran pastor" a false title?
 * It isn't a false title when used predicatively as here or (random example from the ODNB) "His work as broadcaster mirrored much of his work as author and editor." As to the wording I'm blest if I can remember which source prompted it and I've redrawn based on Chadwick and the ODNB.  Tim riley  talk   11:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Still sounds off to me, I must admit, but I know better than to argue with the ODNB. UndercoverClassicist T·C 18:37, 17 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : this might be clearer as "His father did not allow Henson to be baptised or to attend a school until..." -- in theory, he could have turned fourteen before being baptised, and then turned fifteen, and then turned sixteen...
 * True. Done.  Tim riley  talk   11:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Looks the same to me? UndercoverClassicist T·C 16:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Damn and blast! I think I managed an edit conflict with myself. Now attended to.  Tim riley  talk   17:01, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : how did that work? Isn't the point of the godparents to guide and advise the baptised person -- how could he advise himself?
 * This puzzled me and still does. It looks to me as though the rector was bending the rules to breaking point. The BCP has an order of service for the baptism of – lovely phrase – "such as are of Riper Years and able to answer for themselves", and though the baptisee renounces the devil and all his works on his/her own behalf, the BCP says  How it was that this requirement was waived in HH's case I cannot discover.   Tim riley  talk   11:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : not totally sure about the at here (you derive a benefit from something, but just swapping the words leads to a stilted tone). I'd push back against the idea that being widely read means that there's no value in going to school -- school do more than just put a lot of books in front of children! More seriously, I can't actually find this in the ODNB article.
 * We can agree to differ about the preposition, which seems fine to me. I've added a citation for the limited educational benefit. Chadwick says:   Tim riley  talk   11:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I can find no use of "benefit at" in Google Books which means what we want it to (only phrases like "this would benefit at-risk children"). Not a perfect measure, but could you perhaps reassure me by finding it in print somewhere? As I read Chadwick's quotation there, it says clearly that Henson thought he derived no benefit from it, but stops short of endorsing that opinion -- after all, it's predicated on the assumption that games [that is, sports] are "a sinful waste of time", which most educationalists at the time would have quite strongly challenged, and I'd take the "in some subjects" as decidedly double-edged: in other words, C. seems to be saying that Henson had a very narrow range of interests, knew a great deal about them, and was too single-minded, young or naïve to appreciate that there might be value in learning or doing anything else. UndercoverClassicist T·C 18:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * You surprise me. He was at the school and derived no benefit from it. Whether he ought to have benefited from games (a num question if ever I heard one) etc is neither here nor there: the fact is that he didn't.  Tim riley  talk   20:03, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm not arguing otherwise, but I don't think that's a defensible reading of what Chadwick says in the quoted passage. Is tehre another source that puts it differently? UndercoverClassicist T·C 20:56, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Peart-Binns: Henson called the place "a privately run establishment of no great merit" and said that all he learned there was "a smattering of Latin and Greek". He wrote,    Tim riley  talk   07:12, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * If it were me, I'd say it was wisest to write something like "Henson saw little benefit in the education he received there", or similar -- the sources are very clear that he thought it was all pointless, and in many ways I think it says something about his character to frame this very much as his view of things. Whether, for example, learning Latin and Greek, or indeed mixing with people from outside his family and community, were of any benefit to him is something of an abstract question -- however, it's absolutely a matter of fact that he thought they were not. UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 08:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Lightly redrawn.  Tim riley  talk   09:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I wonder if there's room to get Grimley's comment that "Henson's Kentish childhood ... could have come straight out of the pages of Charles Dickens" in somewhere?
 * You seem to be blowing hot and cold about Dickens! But it's a good line, and I've woven it into the text.  Tim riley  talk   11:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I think we do need some mention of Parker's role in Henson's early education -- we've presented her as providing kindness, but Grimley is clear that she was also responsible for introducing him to literature and, in his words, "ensuring that [Henson] received an education".
 * Well, I think the existing words in the text, "ensured that the children were properly educated" covers this. The sources differ on whether she "persuaded" Henson senior to let HH go to school or whether she "insisted".  Tim riley  talk   11:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I more mean what came before: how Parker gave him copies of classical texts and modern literature -- she seems to have been a major part of his education before he actually got a formal one, and therefore, one assumes, a large part of the reason he was in any position to take advantage of going to school. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 15:02, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * OK. I'll add a sentence.  Tim riley  talk   15:50, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

More to follow. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 09:10, 17 July 2024 (UTC)


 * We're inconsistent about whether "fellow" [of All Souls]" should be capitalised. Generally speaking, my reading of MOS:CAPS is that the answer is usually "no" when there's any doubt.
 * Now lower case throughout.  Tim riley  talk   17:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : describing what All Souls is is a challenge, but I'm not sure 'postgraduate college' quite gets the point across -- the key thing is that it has no students, only fellows (normally, a "postgraduate college" is one inhabited by MPhil, DPhil etc candidates). I'm not sure it really needs a detailed introduction here, but some alternative phrasing would be useful.
 * A suggested alternative phrasing more to your liking would be welcomed. I mention the absence of undergraduates in the footnote.  Tim riley  talk   17:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I'll think on it. It's a tricky one, and I must admit I don't totally understand the position of Examination Fellows, who have to (initially) follow a university course but practically have that as their secondary 'job', as far as All Souls is concerned -- and I'm not sure they lose their initial college affiliation (so, for example, a DPhil student in Archaeology at Exeter College also holds an Examination Fellowship at All Souls). On another note, it's not (any longer) the only college without undergraduates; I'm not sure whether that was true when Henson was there, though. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 18:36, 20 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : does "as" here mean "because" or "contemporaneously with"?
 * Both.  Tim riley  talk   17:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : anyone important later on who could be name-checked here?
 * Nobody is named in Henson's memoirs. His contemporaries included Lang, but whether he counted as a friend we are not told. Henson wrote, rather movingly I think, "I loved everybody from the Warden to the Scout's boy, and even now, after more than half a century, I never enter the college without emotion".  Tim riley  talk   17:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : perhaps getting a bit subjective: we would be on safer ground talking about how it was received, or how somebody or other has assessed it.
 * Source now quoted verbatim.  Tim riley  talk   17:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : the usual form would be "Lyttelton and Hart-Davis", but given that this is presumably a letter by one or the other, can we find out which?
 * It was GWL to RH-D (letter of 26 February 1958), but I am reluctant to follow the full bibliographical form, as RH-D edited the letters (after GWL's death) as well, of course, as writing half of them, and the conventional bibliographical details would, in my view, be cumbersome. If you haven't read their letters, permit me to recommend them. Desert Island reading for me. (Now I look again, I see that GWL quotes Henson in his very first letter, dated 27 October 1955, though I'm blest if I know what HH meant by "that state of resentful coma which scholars attempt to dignify by calling research".) Tim riley  talk   17:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC)


 * How about something like "Letter from GWL to RH-D, in RH-D ed. (Year)"? I can see the arguments either way, but I think it's important to clarify who is, at least theoretically, "speaking" here, even if that's not as clear a distinction as it could be. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 18:28, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Tweaked.  Tim riley  talk   16:30, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : worth adding "Anglican", given that we've just said he was a little wobbly as to which religious camp he truly belonged in?
 * Adjusted.  Tim riley  talk   17:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : suggest adding a brief indication of what these people believed in, for those of us not fully versed in the different flavours of Anglicanism.
 * Tricky. They were high church early Anglo Catholics, of the type known in my youth as "tat queens" - lots of vestments, bobbing and bowing, and theatrical carrying on. But we already say "high church" and "Anglo Catholic" and I think on the whole it is best to let those phrases and blue links bear the weight.  Tim riley  talk   17:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I can get behind that. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 08:13, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : would it be accurate to add Liberal (large or small L) here?
 * Well, it was never Liberal policy, though both were at the time Liberals. On balance I'd prefer not to drag the party in here.  Tim riley  talk   17:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Sounds reasonable. So it was just them, rather than any substantial wing of the party? <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 07:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I'd say so, yes.  Tim riley  talk   16:30, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : lots of commas here. Worth splitting the sentence or bringing in some bigger pauses to give it more shape?
 * Tweaked.  Tim riley  talk   17:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : I know we have different ideas about commas, but I think this really needs one after colleague -- alternatively, stick the name first and put a comma after it?
 * Fine. Done.  Tim riley  talk   17:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

More to follow. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 16:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Good. Thanks so far and looking forward to more.  Tim riley  talk   17:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : Is physique the right word here? Cambridge have it as "the shape and size of a human body" (e.g. "he had a very slight physique, so found the work difficult") -- I'm not sure it's a direct synonym for the body itself. "On his body" or simply "on him"?
 * Can't recall where I got the noun, and am quite happy with "on his health" instead.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Works nicely. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 15:35, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : was Salisbury PM at the time (he became so in June)? In either case, do we know what he was doing handing out minor clerical appointments? The "Westminster" section says that it was a personal gift, but that only makes me more confused as to why it was Salisbury's to give.
 * Salisbury had – wait for it – an advowson – the right to appoint a clergyman to a particular living. This was in his private capacity. He was associated in a lay capacity with the Barking parish and knew of HH's work. You're the second reviewer to query this point and I've added an explanatory footnote.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Wonderful in so many ways. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 15:36, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : Bishop of London is parenthetical, so needs a comma on either side (it took me a minute to realise that he wasn't the bishop of a place called "London and Lang".
 * cf. the Bishop of Sodor and Man. Rather nice, but duly comma-ed.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : is this in 1902? Gladstone had been dead for four years by that point -- I'd suggest contextualising a) who Gladstone was, briefly; b) when he said this, and c) why Henson still cared what he thought.
 * The Times, reporting HH's lecture, thought Gladstone's phrase worth repeating. Gladstone coined the phrase back in 1874, but it clearly still resonated with some in 1906.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Can see this one either way -- there would be value in contextualising that, but there's also value in sticking to the point. Will defer to you. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 15:37, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Peruvian Amazon Company doesn't have a hyphen (it's sometimes called the Anglo-Peruvian Amazon Company, though).
 * Fine.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : why the quote marks -- "for what he called..."? At the moment, they read as scare quotes, implying that this label was overblown.
 * It was The Times's phrase. I've clarified.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : what does received institution mean?
 * Most vicars/rectors are formally installed in a new parish by the local bishop. The OED says this: It's rather an impressive service, but neither "institution" nor "induction" has a relevant WP article for me to link to.   Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Would this be clearer as something like "Henson did not undergo the ceremony of institution, by which the Bishop of London would have formally installed him in his parish" -- I'm not quite clear (if it matters) whether this was a Henson thing or a St Margaret's thing. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 15:38, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Good idea. The point is that the Bishop had no locus there. Henson had no boss to call him to heel. But I like your phrasing.  Tim riley  talk   16:30, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Now tweaked.  Tim riley  talk   16:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Suggest linking Defender of the Faith. It's a good quote. I would also link destroyer in the quote that follows, as non-native or non-maritime readers may not immediately pick up that he means a warship (rather than just something destructive).
 * Good idea.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : we've inconsistently applied MOS:CAPS here, and somewhat throughout. The rule on paper is that if the title stands in for someone's name (so "I met the Pope last Thursday" -> "I met Francis last Thursday"), it's capitalised, so most cases like "the Prime Minister did such-and-such" should be. Of course, consistency is king, so I'd have no objection to decapitalising all of them, but we can't have both Bishop and prime minister here.
 * ULC adjusted.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : might give them as the bishops of Mombasa and Uganda, both to be more specific (the British Empire was a big place) and to clarify the quote later: at the moment, we have to infer that he's talking about the same people.
 * Done.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * In the academic sense, symposium should link to Academic conference, but it's only really the right word if there was a physical conference as well -- was there? If so, you would normally say that he presented the paper at the symposium.
 * Well if you read Plato, a symposium is where you get legless and end up with a hangover, while engaging in activity that would get you in trouble under the Sexual Offences Act, 2003.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, yes, but unless the CofE is more interesting than I gave it credit for, we should make the link to the article about the academic rather than the Hellenic meaning of the term. After all, Symposium begins with a hatnote . <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 15:18, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't know what the C of E is like now, but you might be surprised at the goings-on when I was young, but be that as it may, my and your types of symposium, above, are respectively the first and second definitions in the OED, but the third is "A book consisting of essays on various aspects of a subject contributed by a number of different authors". Symposium is rather a chameleon term, like "classical music" which is broadly taken to mean the stuff they play at the Proms, but which specialist musical scholars confine to music of the late 18th and very early 19th century – basically Haydn, Mozart, early Beethoven and Schubert. If we restrict "symposium" to the OED's second definition it would be as if Bach, Verdi and Tchaikovsky didn't write classical music.  Tim riley  talk   16:30, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * You are quite right (and I was quite wrong): symposium can mean the book as well as the event, so our framing is fine if there was no physical conference. As for the link, though -- Symposium (disambiguation) says that readers looking for the ancient Greek event should go to symposium, while those looking for something in academia should go to academic conference or academic journal. I'd suggest changing the link to the last of those, but in any case it needs not to point to symposium. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 19:44, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Link Church in Wales, and give a date for when it was disestablished (in law 1914, in practice 1920)?
 * Linked, but I don't think it would be helpful to put a date in.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : maybe I'm being incorrigibly modern, but how many lay people actually knew or cared? It would be a bit like saying "in general, most people support the Under-Secretary of State for Pigeons": if she's got an approval rating of 75% among the four people who have heard of her, that's a little misleading.
 * You are indeed being excessively modern. There was a helluva fuss in the national newspapers.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : brief drip-feeds the idea, only really brought home in the last paragraph, that he didn't last long there -- I think we should either let the cat out of the bag the first time, and say that he remained there only until 1920, or else keep mum until we get to his transfer.
 * Well, we've already said in the lead and the info-box that he was there from 1918 to 1920.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * True, but under MOS:LEAD, that's generally considered a slightly separate thing to the body -- after all, we always start the body with the subject's full name, even though that was in both the lead and the infobox. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 15:13, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Right ho. Done.  Tim riley  talk   16:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Was Henson's Freemasonry ever controversial? It would seem a gift for opponents who wanted to paint him as unorthodox and/or heretical.
 * As far as I can make out, being a prominent Freemason was uncontroversial in the C of E of those days (though it ain't now!) Henson's contemporaries in the dioceses of London (and later Canterbury), Norwich and Lincoln – Geoffrey Fisher, Percy Herbert and Nugent Hicks – were among the bishops who were Freemasons.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : we imply almost that Henson just disliked his speaking style, and give prohibition as an example of their disagreement, but was there anything more substantial to this conflict?
 * This bit seems pretty self-explanatory to me.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * It isn't to me, but it might be when you explain what you think I'm missing? <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 15:18, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, Welldon was given to making public statements that went against the pronouncements of his diocesan superior, as illustrated by the example of his criticising HH's liberal view of alcohol. (What Welldon imagined Jesus was doing at Cana in John 2:11 I have no idea.) Peart-Binns says of Welldon, "And he was found, in the experience of colleagues, to be radically untrustworthy, not deliberately or consciously, but because he could never resist the appeal of the Gallery. He would never fail to sacrifice a friend to a cheer!"  Tim riley  talk   16:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah: I think it would then be useful to amend or add to "found infuriating": as currently expressed, I realised that Henson found his speeches annoying, but it wasn't clear that he was actually saying anything objectionable or insubordinate (as opposed to being an annoying speaker, self-promotional, or generally not to Henson's tastes). Your explanation here that the prohibition pronouncement is an illustrative example of Welldon contradicting his boss clarifies things tremendously, but I didn't pick that up from the article itself. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 19:39, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : a common metaphor, especially in journalism, but I think the gloss pulls it the wrong way -- it sounds as if we mean relationships between two buildings rather than the people who worked in them. One way to get around this would be to introduce Auckland Castle a little earlier, or to say something like "Henson's staff at..."?
 * I disagree. This is a thoroughly respectable construction. Shakespeare uses metonymy and synecdoche all over the place.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * It's not quite the construction that's the issue, it's the zeugma: we have to simultaneously understand "Auckland Castle" as metonymy and not-metonymy: for it to work with the first clause, it has to carry one meaning, but the second clause can't be understood with that meaning. Most style guides advise avoiding zeugma, unless a) trying to show off and b) creating some conscious effect, and I'm not sure either is really the case here. As for Shakespeare, I shall bring that up next time I write an article in iambic pentameter! With all that said, you're right that there's no real chance of misunderstanding or concrete grammatical error here, so this does ultimately come down to de gustibus. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 15:12, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I can do iambic pentameter. I shall be more impressed if you do an article in terza rima.  Tim riley  talk   16:30, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I would name Eton College in full on first mention; we normally do for schools, universities and so on, and Eton is also a town.
 * OK. Done  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * It might be worth moving the explanation that "in gaiters" meant "bishops" to the main text -- but is that quite right? Admittedly, I'm remembering this from notes on The Dead, but there gaiters are shorthand for being well-heeled and a bit fancy-pants -- not necessarily being a clergyman. Put another way, all of his bishop guests would be, metaphorically, in gaiters, but not all of his gaitered guests would be bishops.
 * Whatever James Joyce meant by the word, it unquestionably and to my mind unmistakeably refers in this quotation to the upper clergy.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * It might, but Chadwick isn't explicit about that, and we've talked before about the dangers of putting our own interpretation on quotes (with, as I remember, the proverbial boots on the opposite feet). I think we need some sort of source for what's currently given as "i.e. episcopal" in the footnote, which isn't supported by the citation currently given. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 15:18, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I've added a citation (somewhat grumpily).  Tim riley  talk   16:30, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Much obliged <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 19:46, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : reads more naturally as of 1936 to me, given that we've already used a temporal phrase for the denouncing at the start of the sentence.
 * Done.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : can we do anything about the WP:SEAOFBLUE -- three in a row?
 * True, but I'm dashed if I can see how to avoid it if we are to blue-link what oughter to be blue-linked.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Swapping the name and title helps you a bit: "James Gordon, the suffragan Bishop of Jarrow", but I think that's probably the best we can do. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 15:31, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Quite so. Done.  Tim riley  talk   16:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : in this day and age, would advise each individual's... -- Henson probably didn't intentionally mean to throw children or non-binary people to the dogs, or indeed know what non-binary people were. As it's not a quotation, we should use modern, inclusive language unless we have good reason to think he consciously meant to do otherwise.
 * Done. (Never crossed my septuagenarian mind.)   Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : just checking that the Oxford English -ize is original?
 * Oh, yes! In those days, the OUP, CUP, The Times and Fowler held fast to the idiotic superstition that ize should always be used where the verb has been formed by using the suffix equivalent to the Greek suffix -izein (which retained its z when Latinised), but that ise should be used for words formed in a different way. Who knows, one day the OUP may catch up with the mid-20th century.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : a bit of a cliché, but a compound modifier in any case, so hyphenate it if it's staying. Likewise.
 * I don't like "damage limitation" either, but have tried and failed to think of something that says the same thing better. Any thoughts?  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * "The Church attempted to avoid conflict..."? <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 15:18, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Not nearly strong enough. This was seen by most of the C of E as a disaster. Poor Archbishop Davidson was heartbroken. It really mattered.  Tim riley  talk   16:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : not ironic? I understand ironical to mean "intentionally suffused with irony": so "he gave an ironical smile at the ironic situation".
 * The OED doesn't insist on that differentiation, but I'm happy with the shorter form.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Suggest outlining that Dean Dwelly was Dean of Liverpool, not just some bloke giving out invitations to cathedrals?
 * Hmm. Not convinced, but done.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Given that we've linked everything else the Axis did, may as well link Nazi antisemitism to e.g. Racial policy of Nazi Germany?
 * Done.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : as it doesn't affect the pronunciation, MOS:CONFORM would advocate for a hyphen in patched-up.
 * Done.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : can we vary the structure here?
 * Done.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : I'm not sure the two adjectives really work for prose: advise cutting substantial, as the next clause does a perfectly good job of setting out just how substantial it was. There's also a potentially awkward double-meaning here: does substantial mean "really long" (fine) or "full of wisdom" (not so fine for WP:V)?
 * Redrawn.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : as written, needs to be was, but we might rearrange to make the letters, rather than the publication, the subject.
 * Redrawn.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : perhaps look at the repetition?
 * It's deliberate! I rather like rhetorical repetition in the right place, which I think this is.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I find it odd in the "Reputation" section that such a controversial figure appears to have nobody willing to say a bad word about him after his death. Is that the case?
 * It seems so. Even the people he battled with such as Gore liked him personally. I daresay that if Welldon had outlived HH he might have struggled to say something complimentary, and some Durham miners probably retained a lasting grudge, but on the whole HH was liked as well as respected.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * : needs a slight rephrase (suggest shifting the agnostic bit to the end, and probably dropping the article) -- most Welsh people were not agnostic.
 * Done.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Lovely work -- as ever, impressively stylish, learned and readable. I hope the above is useful. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 07:43, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * ; suggest cutting as indicated: the part that's opinion is already attributed to Grimley, and we can be more concise in what is a long foonote.
 * Done.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Thank you – also as ever – for superb contributions.  Tim riley  talk   12:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Comments by Fowler&fowler
Glad to see this. I'm enjoying reading HHH. As I explained on my user talk page, I've made most of my (off the top of my head) comments at user:Fowler&fowler/HHH FAC. Eventually, I'll write a short paragraph here. I expect to support it. Fowler&amp;fowler «Talk»  18:28, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Glad you're enjoying the article. I've responded to your comments on your tlak page, and look forward to more.  Tim riley  talk   11:55, 17 July 2024 (UTC)