Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Thomas Percy (Gunpowder Plot)/archive1


 * 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 SandyGeorgia 21:35, 26 November 2010.

Thomas Percy (Gunpowder Plot)

 * Nominator(s): Parrot of Doom 19:34, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, its another Gunpowder Plot article. Thomas Percy was something of a rogue, a man who would do whatever it took to get the job done. He also reportedly had a bit on the side, was into bribery, killing and most importantly, pork pies. Huge pork pies, so large that when King James I didn't do what Percy had said he would do, he promptly joined up with Robert Catesby, and attempted to blow the king and his government sky high. The rest is history. Parrot of Doom 19:34, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Sourcing comments
 * Missing bibliographic details for Haynes 1999
 * Fixed
 * When sources have two dates (ex. Fraser or Dixon), be consistent in which date the footnote uses
 * Fixed
 * "wrote a letter mitigating the offence" vs "wrote mitigating the offence" in the source; "entrap the Scottish warden of the middle marches" vs "entrap the Scottish warden of the middle marches" in the source; "not least from an officer he replaced" vs "not least from one of the officers he replaced" in the source - close paraphrasing, should probably do some rewording
 * I wish I could, but the only information I have on these aspects of Percy's life are from the ODNB, and that doesn't expand on them (or provide a citation so I can check). That's why I didn't rephrase too much, for fear of altering the meaning.  I'm betting this info is from the family papers, which will be stored offline, probably either in London or Northumberland somewhere.  Believe me, I've looked.
 * I've looked around a bit and I still can't find anything on this. I've therefore made this change. Parrot of Doom 23:05, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * "tall, florid man, with a broad beard—'the head more white then the beard'—and stooping shoulders, being also 'long footed, small legged'" - probably worth noting where those embedded quotations came from
 * Done
 * "Letter from the Robert Devereux" - why "the"?
 * Done
 * "for which he was rewarded with £200" - source?
 * ODNB. I wish Wikipedia's inline citing system could be more intuitive, but it isn't.  I've moved both citations together, at least that way its less confusing.
 * Formatting for ODNB refs varies slightly between footnotes - should be made consistent
 * Done
 * Is De Fonblanque organized by volume or by part?
 * I'm afraid I can't answer that in detail, since one is offline. It was added by another editor, presumably he has the original.
 * Durst is missing publisher location. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:24, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know it. Parrot of Doom 20:56, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Other A S Barne books (the publishers in this instance) were published from New York, if that's helpful at all. Hchc2009 (talk) 09:40, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * If that's acceptable I don't mind, although I generally don't add things I haven't already seen. Parrot of Doom 10:56, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I've just done a quick Google search, and second hand booksellers are referencing that specific ISBN edition as " A. S. Barnes & Company, South Brunswick / New York / London, 1971." Hchc2009 (talk) 19:16, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've added that information. Parrot of Doom 19:48, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Support with just a few quibbles that don't prevent me supporting.
 * shouldn't it be "Peterhouse College" in the lead?
 * Done.
 * Were Catesby and Percy unimpressed with the whole of the dynasty or just with James? (lead again). The article body says he was complaining about James, not the whole dynasty.
 * I take 17th-century politics to mean that the dynasty at that point was represented by James - he was basically the first monarch in the Jacobean line, distinct from the Tudors.
 * Life before 1603 - last sentnence of the first paragraph .. the "Their son, Robert,…" is a bit unclear in this context, as the last "he" mentioned isn't Perce, but Parker. I'm assuming that you mean Percy and Martha's son Robert, not that Martha had a son with Parker…
 * Done.
 * I have not reviewed the images for compliance with image policy.
 * sourcing looks fine. I ran the article through earwig's tool and attempted to use Coren's tool, but it hung.
 * Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:50, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Ta very much :) Parrot of Doom 00:14, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Dab/EL check - no dabs, no link problems. -- Pres N  23:13, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Support: I reviewed this article at GA and could find very little wrong with it. It covers the topic thoroughly, is very well written and is easy to follow. Three trivial points which may be ignored and do not affect my support.
 * "but the consensus among historians is that what promises James did make, were oral rather than written." Is the comma necessary?
 * I just insert these things so they sound natural as I read them aloud. If you read the entire sentence aloud (its fairly long) I think it fits ok.
 * The "Plot" section begins with Percy becoming a plotter, then goes back to his meeting with Catesby. A minor point, and feel free to completely ignore it, but would it be better to have the Catesby meeting first then the date of his joining the plot?
 * Its structured that way so people understand that his joining was as a result of earlier meetings, but without actually saying it. Just a bit of storytelling really.
 * Possibly irrelevent, but "Cecil was already aware of certain stirrings before he received the letter": how did he know? --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:22, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Its in the Gunpowder Plot article. Too much detail for here, but basically the man had many fingers in many many pies. Parrot of Doom 01:23, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Wondering if any of the following sources might have additional info? Sasata (talk) 19:20, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Strategy and Motivation in the Gunpowder Plot
 * Mark Nicholls
 * The Historical Journal, Vol. 50, No. 4 (Dec., 2007), pp. 787-807


 * Gunpowder, Treason, and Scots
 * Jenny Wormald
 * The Journal of British Studies, Vol. 24, No. 2, Politics and Religion in the Early Seventeenth Century: New Voices (Apr., 1985), pp. 141-168


 * Treason's Reward: The Punishment of Conspirators in the Bye Plot of 1603
 * Mark Nicholls
 * The Historical Journal, Vol. 38, No. 4 (Dec., 1995), pp. 821-842

Support - an excellent article, meeting all the FA criteria, in my opinion. A handful of tiny queries, none of which affect my support: *"Northumberland, whom it seems might…" – should be "who" – this is not an accusative Tim riley (talk) 13:12, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * "…he delivered it to Salisbury. Cecil was already aware…" – Earlier blue-link notwithstanding, this looks at first glance like two different people, and is perhaps confusing
 * " Catesby's reaction was somewhat different…" It would be helpful to know how Catesby knew about the letter
 * Grays Inn Road – usually spelled with an apostrophe, I think (and is so spelled in the WP article)
 * In Note 2, the apostrophes are of the non-WP curved kind, unless my ageing eyes deceive me.
 * Thanks for the comments, I've corrected the points you raised. I don't think there's much point in detailing how Catesby came to know of the letter, anyone wishing to know more can click on his article.  There's a lot of repetition in these plotter articles, I'm just trying to keep it in check. Parrot of Doom 13:53, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Image check? Sandy Georgia (Talk) 00:08, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Image check the images are all old enough for the originals to be out of copyright. Although the NPG is asserting "sweat of brow" in preparing its reproductions, their use is currently within Wikipedia policy.  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  13:02, 24 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Support no significant issues  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  13:02, 24 November 2010 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.