Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hubert Walter


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 03:35, 30 May 2008.

Hubert Walter
Self-nom I'm nominating this article for featured article because it's expanded greatly from where it was when I first started editing, I've worked hard to ensure that only relible scholarly sources are used, and while it still lacks a picture of the man himself or his tomb, it is actually illustrated. All aspects of his life are covered, from his start under Henry II to his coronation of King John. This is a very significant individual in English history, who unfortunately doesn't figure largely in most folks' memory. He's been really fun to write about, though. It's very kindly been copy-edited by Karanacs and Malleus, to remove my weasely academic writing! Ealdgyth - Talk 19:55, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Daft comment. Who's going to do the source checking? ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 22:02, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Me? (ducks) No clue. Not my department. Boy was it nice to put up something I didn't have to source check too.... Ealdgyth - Talk 00:04, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * I'm not sure about the MOS on this, but isn't generally "circa" abbreviated to "c." and then linked to circa?
 * I have no clue. I don't generally stay up on MOS issues like that. I honestly figured that circa would work better because it's not an abbreviation. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:03, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Both American and British spelling are present in the article.
 * That's because the main author is a Yank. It should be British spelling, and Malleus attempted to find most of them, but a pointer to the glaring ones would be greatly appreciated by this Yank. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:03, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Aren't centuries supposed to be linked when they're relevant? They seem to be relevant here.
 * Can do. I generally try to avoid overlinking. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:03, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


 * "Walter served King Henry II of England in many different ways, not only in financial administration." - should that be a semicolon? As usual, I'm not sure, and too cowardly to be bold.
 * Someone else know? I barely squeaked through grammar in school, the various uses of the various parts fail me at times. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:03, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


 * "Walter accompanied King Richard on the Third Crusade and was one of the principal persons involved in raising Richard's ransom after the king had been captured in Germany while returning home." - "had been" sounds awkward. Maybe "was" instead?
 * Will do. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:03, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


 * "He also served as Richard's justiciar until 1198, in which role he was responsible for raising the money Richard needed to prosecute his wars in France." - "in which role" -> "a role in which"?
 * works. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:03, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, changed "in which role" to "where" which is more concise. That work? Ealdgyth - Talk 01:06, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I only checked the lead - that especially should be spotless of awkward/incorrect grammar since most readers read only the lead. If I'm brave enough to tackle the entire text (read: have an inordinate amount of spare time), I might do that. Nousernamesleft copper, not wood 00:58, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Sources check (teeheehee)
 * Everything looks good, actually. According to, needs registration. That's allowed, though, so all seems good. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:06, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, it does, but it's also a printed work, so the link is a courtesy link. I'm told that most folks in the UK get free access through their library. I guess I should have put registration required in it too, but I'm not sure the cite encyclopedia has that field. (ponders) Ealdgyth - Talk 14:26, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Correct. I'm in the UK and have a library card. I entered the barcode number, and, voila, it works. — Wackymacs ( talk  ~  edits ) 21:39, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I put something at the end of the ref (in the edition field) saying that registration/fee would be required. Hopefully that works fine with the MOS mavens! Ealdgyth - Talk 22:34, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Support. I've been bold and addressed my own issues,. Please check that I haven't done anything stupid. Could you make clearer what aspect of Salisbury was deemed to be a reward, (Salisbury was a town), and I didn't like the expression while on crusade, but couldn't think of a better one. An engaging, comprehensive and well-written article, thanks. Graham Colm Talk 11:28, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I will gladly expand the Salisbury bit, (it's the diocese in this instance, it's medievalist jargon to just refer to the diocese by shorthand like that. We know by context that a bishopric is meant since he's a cleric.) I'm not too fond of "while on Crusade" either, but "while over in the Holy Land killing infidels" which is how they would have described their activiy isn't exactly a NPOV statement (and rightly so, I might add). Ealdgyth - Talk 14:26, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Support - Great prose, referenced throughout and good layout/usage of suitable photos. Very nice work, Ealdgyth. Keep it up. — Wackymacs ( talk  ~  edits ) 19:32, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Support. I conducted a pre-FAC review at Eagldyth's invitation, and all issues I found have been addressed. The article seems extremely comprehensive considering the scarcity of records of the time period. Karanacs (talk) 21:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Support. As with Karanacs, Ealdgyth invited me to carry out a pre-FAC review. All the issues I raised have been addressed to my satisfaction. I believe that this comprehensive article meets the FA criteria. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:40, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Support I couldn't resist a few tweaks, please check that you're happy. I'm impressed that Firefox's in-line spell check picked up archepiscopal as a typo! jimfbleak (talk) 07:33, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Support I have added links etc. Personally I would prefer the lead rearranged into a overall summary para, then the more detailed ones. You read a long way before finding out he was Lord Chancellor. Johnbod (talk) 16:33, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, better now (see below). Johnbod (talk) 22:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Support Comments A very interesting article! It was a pleasure to read. I have just a few questions; I was hoping that some further explanations could be added into the article for readers like myself who are largely ignorant of this period in history. Also, a few sections of the article could benefit from some rewriting to make them flow a bit better.


 * Hubert Walter (c. 1160–13 July 1205) was chief justiciar of England and archbishop of Canterbury in the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries. - Should the opening sentence better express his notability? I don't know much about this period in history and I read this sentence as "he was a government functionary". (Note: That I'm American might have something to do with this!)
 * Hm. I could say "Hubert Walter (c. 1160-13 July 1205) in the late twelfth and early thirteenth century was chief justiciar, one of the principal royal advisors, and archbishop of Canterbury, the highest ecclesiastical office in England." but I'm worried it's getting too long and drawn out that way. I can see not understanding the chief justiciar, but do I need to explain Archbishop? Ealdgyth - Talk 03:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * See my comment above. You certainly need to mention he was Lord Chandellor in the first ?500 words. Much of the stuff in the last para of the lead would be better in the first. Johnbod (talk) 10:10, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * What about something like "Hubert Walter (c. 1160-13 July 1205) was an influential royal adviser in the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries in the positions of chief justiciar of England, archbishop of Canterbury, and Lord Chancellor". - or something like that? Awadewit (talk) 13:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm going to work on revising this a bit per your and Johnbod's comments. Just need to cool off after a very hot morning working with horses! Ealdgyth - Talk 19:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Reworked it a bit, let me know what you think? Ealdgyth - Talk 20:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * So much better! Thanks for taking the time! Awadewit (talk) 22:48, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Walter served King Henry II of England in many different ways, not just in financial administration. - Could we briefly suggest what these ways were?
 * Done. Inserted "... including diplomatic and judicial efforts." Ealdgyth - Talk 03:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Walter's mother died at West Dereham in Norfolk, probably the location of Walter's birth, some time between 1150 and 1160. - This makes it seem like her death is related to his birth in some way. Is that intended?
 * It's more that her death place shows the likely spot where he was born. Reworded to "Walter's mother died at West Dereham in Norfolk, some time between 1150 and 1160, and this gives a possible place of Walter's birth." which hopefully expresses this better. Ealdgyth - Talk 03:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry - I still don't see why where his mother died should suggest where he was born. Did she die around the time he was born? Did she die during childbirth? I feel like some information is missing here. Awadewit (talk) 13:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The source for that information seems to think it's connected, but I will just take it out. Reworded to "Walter's family was from West Dereham in Norfolk, which is probably where Walter was born." Ealdgyth - Talk 19:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the point is that 12th century women didn't go hopping around as much as their modern equivalents. If she died there, she was highly likely to have lived there for a long time. Johnbod (talk) 19:22, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * He was appointed Dean of York by order of King Henry II about July 1186.[1] The archbishopric had been vacant since 1181 and would remain so until 1189, so it was Walter's job as dean to administer the archbishopric - The archbishopric of York?
 * Yes. I suspect this was a casulaty of either my understanding it to be implicit, or of a copyedit pass. Clarified now. Ealdgyth - Talk 03:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Walter also was an unsuccessful candidate to become Archbishop of York in September 1186 - Do we know why?
 * We know that the king rejected all five names that were presented to him, but not why the king did so. I can go into detail about that, if you really want, but I purposefully left that amount of detail out. Ealdgyth - Talk 03:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a footnote? Awadewit (talk) 13:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Added information in a footnote. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * In 1187 Walter, along with Glanvill and King Henry II, attempted to mediate a dispute between the Archbishop of Canterbury, Baldwin of Exeter, and the monks of the cathedral chapter. - a dispute about what?
 * Again, I can attempt to explain, but at this point, it's probably shorter to leave it out. It was a dispute between the monks of the cathedral chapter and Baldwin over Baldwin's desire to found a non-monastic church staffed by canons which would be in Canterbury itself, and in honor of Saint Thomas Becket. The monks of the cathedral chapter were scared that this was the first step of an attempt to either remove the relics of Thomas from the cathedral to the new foundation, thus depriving the monks of a very large source of income, or an attempt to remove the monks from the cathedral chapter and replace them with canons. Some (about half, including Canterbury) English cathedrals up until the Reformation were uniquely served by monks, and not the canons that were usual on the continent. English monastic cathedral chapters were always scared that they would be replaced by canons and this could lead to some rather heated disputes between the cathedral chapter and its nominal head, the bishop/archbishop. Still want me to include this information? Ealdgyth - Talk 03:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that explaining the dispute is worthwhile, especially since it comes up again in the article. Awadewit (talk) 13:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Urf. Okies. Will try to summarize this briefly. Some may come in footnotes. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, expanded it a bit, let me know what you think. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:08, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Excellent summary! Awadewit (talk) 22:48, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * In the first paragraph of "Justiciar", is there a way to briefly describe the wars? What were they about?
 * Added "... which began with Philip's attempts to acquire Richard's possessions on the continent." Ealdgyth - Talk 03:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * When John showed no signs of submitting, Walter called an ecclesiastical council at Westminster for the purposes of excommunicating John unless he submitted - What happened with this? Did John submit? I felt like I was left hanging.
 * Clarified, I hope. DIdn't want to get too far off topic. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:30, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * In foreign affairs, Walter negotiated peace with Scotland in 1195 and with the Welsh in 1197. In 1196, Walter quickly suppressed a popular uprising in London led by William Fitz Osbern. - Can this paragraph be expanded? A bit of context added, perhaps? Why did peace need to be negotiated with Scotland and Wales, for example? Why was there a popular uprising? Etc.
 * Expanded a bit. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:30, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * This is so helpful! Thanks `Awadewit (talk)


 * According to the Life of William Marshal, when word reached William Marshal, one of the richest and most influential barons, that Richard was dead, he consulted with Walter and discussed whom to support as the next king. - Could we add a date for the Life?
 * added in a date, it was commissioned by the eldest son of WM soon after WMs death, so it's very close in time frame. Ealdgyth - Talk 04:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I take it that the diplomatic missions to France in 1201 and 1204 were unsuccessful? Perhaps this could be made a bit more explicit?
 * Made it explicit. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:35, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The last paragraph of the "Death and legacy" section sort of trails off. I wasn't really sure what the relevance of the authorship debate was.
 * Attempted to explain that. Sorry, I forget that most folks don't know what all these obscure tracts are. (I really need to write a wiki article on that tract.. but...) Ealdgyth - Talk 04:05, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * This is better. Thanks! Awadewit (talk) 13:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The "Early life" section is a bit choppy. It just seems like a list of facts that are only tangentially related. Could some flow be added to this paragraph? In particular, could the information about the aunt and uncle be narrated a bit more clearly?
 * I've moved the information on the aunt and uncle to after the fact that Glanvill helped out Theobald and Hubert's career. Hopefully that'll make things flow better. Ealdgyth - Talk 04:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The first paragraph is still a bit choppy, but there is so little information, it is hard to make it flow together, isn't it? This version is better. Awadewit (talk) 13:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I moved the bit about the paternal lands up a bit in the paragraph, maybe that'll help. Let me know? There really isn't a lot of information available about him, unless we want to get into OR. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The paragraphs in both the "Early assignments" and "Under John" sections are a bit disconnected from each other. Is there any way to provide smooth transitions between the paragraphs within these sections?
 * Hopefully, done, without ticking off my copyeditors. Ealdgyth - Talk 04:05, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks - this makes for easier reading! Awadewit (talk) 13:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Sometimes Walter is referred to as "Hubert". Is there a reason for this?
 * Because medievalists usually refer to folks by either name, for a number of reasons. I'll go back an prune them back to Walters. Ealdgyth - Talk 04:05, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I think I got them all now. (Search functions are so nice.) Ealdgyth - Talk 19:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I hope these suggestions are helpful. Awadewit (talk) 17:58, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Awadewit, I'm on the road, so I'll try to hopefully take care of most of these tomorrow night, when (cross your fingers) I'll set up at the client's place. I'll have to take some time on those, since some of the questions need me to dig into the books that are packed into the car. Just wanted you to know I saw it and they look dealable, just need to not be on the road. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:19, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Take your time. I'm not one of those people who expect responses within the hour. :) Awadewit (talk) 16:09, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Took care of the easy ones, the other three will take a bit more digging into the book boxes, so it'll be tomorrow Ealdgyth - Talk 04:12, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I think I've got everything now. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:08, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much! Awadewit (talk) 22:48, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Support: Just a few comments.
 * What does "he disciplined the monks between the death of Henry de Sully and the election of John of Coutances" mean? And what were the "ecclesiastical abuses"?
 * Clarified a bit. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Is there supposed to be a space in "FitzOsbern"?
 * Depends on who is writing the word. I left the space in because the article its linked to has a space. You'll see 'Fitz Osbern" 'fitzOsbern" "fitz-Osbern" "Fitz-Osbern" "FitzOsbern" and "Fitzosbern" scholars haven't settled on a standard. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Is there a better way to say, "Walter was the butt of jokes..."?
 * I wish. I'll try to think of one. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * In the References section, you may want to add OCLC numbers for books printed before ISBN became a standard. To facilitate this, there is an oclc parameter in the template which will then provide weblinks to the World Cat entry.
 * I'll try to get to this later, make no promises, it's a busy day here at the ranch. Vets, breeding and farriers! Ealdgyth - Talk 14:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Another bishop down, how many more to go? :) --RelHistBuff (talk) 11:31, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * A lot. Lots and lots. (grins). I think next up is a horse breed though...Ealdgyth - Talk 14:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.