Wikipedia:Peer review/Edmund the Martyr/archive1

Edmund the Martyr


I've listed this article for peer review as part of its preparation for FAC. Thanks, Amitchell125 (talk) 11:41, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Comments from Modussiccandi

 * I would say that the lead is somewhat to long. As you know, I'm personally not disinclined to more substantial lead sections, but I think there should be one fewer paragraphs. The article has 15,826 readable characters (of which the lead is about 2,500); according to MOS:LEADLENGTH, three paragraphs would be appropriate for an article of this length. Points you could consider condensing include the details about the fictions biographies (second para.) and his cult (fourth para).
 * Done (please comment). Happy to take another look if needs be. Amitchell125 (talk) 20:03, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Great, I will take a look at the new lead tomorrow. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 21:59, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

New Lead

 * 'an annal': could be removed. I think it's enough to know that he appears in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and the term 'annal' might be confusing.
 * Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 09:59, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 'the Danes' demand': the initiated reader might not know that the Danes belong to the Great Heathen Army. I'd would be ideal if there was a recognisable connection between Army and the demand.
 * Done.Amitchell125 (talk) 10:06, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Is there a possible link for 'cult'?
 * Cult (religious practice) used. Amitchell125 (talk) 10:11, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Perhaps add a brief introduction for Abbo of Fleury.
 * Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 10:17, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 'The saint's remains were temporarily moved from Bury St Edmunds to London for safekeeping in 1010': this is quite specific for the lead and comes as a surprise since it's not been said that his remains used to be at Bury St Edmunds. Perhaps one could exchange this sentence for a different piece of information elsewhere in the lead.
 * Text amended. Amitchell125 (talk) 10:28, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Link 'patron saints'.
 * Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 10:29, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * An inline citation is needed at the end of the first paragraph.
 * Text now removed (it was rather vague, anyway). Amitchell125 (talk) 10:31, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Should 'Edmund was descended from the ancient nobility of his race' be in inverted commas because it's virtually a verbatim translation?
 * Agreed, now done. Amitchell125 (talk) 10:33, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 'It is known that...' could be omitted.
 * Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 10:38, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I would give a translation for EADMUND REX AN. and EADMUND REX.
 * Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 13:49, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * The "Death" subsection requires some context on the Scandinavian invasion. I know that the citations speaks largely for itself, but it might be more informative to just paraphrase its content and add some explanatory material.
 * Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 10:00, 14 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Æthelstan is linked twice and should have a brief introduction on the first occasion.
 * Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:02, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure whether 'a coinage' is the proper usage. Perhaps a 'series of coins'?
 * Agreed, now amended. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:04, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Edward the Elder is not introduced.
 * Done, citation required (to follow). Amitchell125 (talk) 13:23, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 'the design based' is not syntactically connected with the preceding sentence.
 * Sentence now split. Amitchell125 (talk) 13:31, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Link 'pennies' and 'half-pennies'?
 * Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 13:35, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 'SCE EADMVND REX— O St Edmund the king!' I guess the translation is about right, but I wonder where the 'O' comes from - it's not in the Latin. However, you'd be right to follow the source if this is their translation.
 * It might be best to leave the translation be, as more than more reputable source uses it. Amitchell125 (talk) 14:01, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Link 'legend'.
 * Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 14:05, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't link 'England'.
 * Unlinked here, but where England refers to the medieval kingdom, there is a link to the appropriate article. Amitchell125 (talk) 14:13, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * The comma after 'King Canute' is unnecessary.
 * Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 15:05, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Introduce Canute.
 * Done (citation to follow). Amitchell125 (talk) 15:18, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 'as atonement for the sins of his forefathers': I find the language somewhat unencyclopaedic unless it repeats the words of a source (in which case there should be inverted commas).
 * Sentence deleted (it can't be verified, and similar stories about his crown being deposited elsewhere exist) Amitchell125 (talk) 16:35, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what 'arose' means here.
 * Paragraph amended to emphasise the growth of the town. Amitchell125 (talk) 16:54, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Could 'later' be specified?
 * Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:35, 9 January 2022 (UTC)


 * If the material in the infobox does not feature in the article (which IMO it should), its entries need to be referenced
 * Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 16:16, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 'It was traditionally claimed' is vague. There has to be more precise information on this tradition.
 * Paragraph amended. Amitchell125 (talk) 17:05, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 'by Edmund's intercessions' seems inappropriate for an encyclopaedia. I have not looked at the source, but I suppose something like 'which the population ascribed to Edmund's intercession' could work.
 * Agreed, sentence now amended. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:56, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * M. R. James and Charles Biggs should not be called Dr.
 * Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:51, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 'they remained': James and Biggs or the relics?
 * Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:45, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 'to this day': a case for MOS:DATED.
 * Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:43, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Passio Sancti Eadmundi

 * The first sentence contains no new information, it seems.
 * Sentence deleted. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:15, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 'The historian Susan Ridyard' has already been introduced
 * Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:16, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 'maintains' falls under MOS:SAID
 * Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:18, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I'd remove 'cruelly'
 * Removed. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:21, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * The term passio is only introduced in the third paragraph. It should come at the start with an explanation.
 * Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:39, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 'went seeking' needs copy editing
 * Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:40, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * "Here, here, here,": in the lead it says that the Latin was 'hic, hic, hic'. This should also be reflected here if it is to remain in the lead.
 * Text amended (to the OE words). Amitchell125 (talk) 11:49, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Who is Gransden?
 * Explained. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:52, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * This section might need to be reorganised: since the exposition is so murky, the reader needs to infer the this document had the title Passio Sancti Eadmundi. A real introduction to the text itself and the genre of passio is needed. The current text reads like a plot summary. If it is, no footnotes are needed (WP:PLOTCITE). The last para. gives what seems like a critical evaluation of the passio. This should be communicated more clearly + contain more than just the view of Gransden.


 * I wonder why the passio is not included here.
 * You're right, so I've the passio section here. Amitchell125 (talk) 13:14, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Introduce Geoffrey of Wells if possible.
 * Done, just. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:02, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 'later': when and in what text?
 * '(Bishop Humbert of Elmham)' and '(probably Bures St Mary in Suffolk)' could be turned into prose.
 * Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:13, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 'present day': see above
 * Sorted, this may need to be expanded upon, though. Amitchell125 (talk) 17:08, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 'Edmund's death bears resemblance to the fate suffered by St Sebastian, St Denis and St Mary of Egypt' was already mentioned earlier
 * Duplicate text removed. Amitchell125 (talk) 13:10, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 'is said' by whom?
 * Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 13:07, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Patronages

 * 'During the 15th century, St George replaced Edmund as the patron saint of England': this fact has not been brought up yet.
 * Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 16:58, 11 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 'began': is there any more detail available?
 * Paragraph expanded slightly, more to follow. Amitchell125 (talk) 09:42, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

In art

 * Could this section be turned into prose?
 * Done, this section clearly needs more work done to it. AM


 * The content of the section is not well defined: several written 'artworks' are listed, mostly form the Middle Ages. What distinguished them from those in the 'hagiographies and legends' section?
 * Quite (see above). Amitchell125 (talk) 14:10, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Apart from these points, I noticed that the structure of the article appears wayward: from the 'Veneration' section onwards, no consistent principle of organisation is used and the sections overlap in their content. I imagine a more coherent layout would need to be found. I hope my pointers will be of some help to you. Do let me know when this article goes to FAC. I will be happy to raise new points of detail there. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 20:48, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I should add that I'm aware that none of this was introduced by you. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 22:02, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for these comments, Modussiccandi, all of which are welcomed. Amitchell125 (talk) 09:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Comments by Borsoka

 * Edmund is first mentioned in the 870 annal of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle compiled 20 years after his death. Based on the article, I understand he was first mentioned on his coins.
 * Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:06, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I am still uncertain whether coins or the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle contain the first written reference to Edmund. When mentioning numismatic evidence, do you refer to memorial coins? It is unclear. Borsoka (talk) 02:51, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * The text is hopefully now clearer, as Edmund's own coinage provides the earliest evidence, something that I didn't properly explain before. Amitchell125 (talk) 15:33, 3 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Is note 2 necessary? Its text is repeated in section "Death and burial" (although the two quotes are slightly different).
 * Agreed, note now removed. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:26, 1 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Why is not the term "Annals of St Bertin" italicized? Or why is the term "Anglo-Saxon Chronicle" italicized?
 * Italicized the former. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:28, 1 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Do we need Old English quotes in the main text? Perhaps, they could be placed in notes.
 * I think we do, and would rather keep them in. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:30, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I think they do not improve the article's prose. Borsoka (talk) 02:51, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Text now placed in a note. Amitchell125 (talk) 15:16, 3 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Is Haegelisdun the place where he was killed?
 * No one is sure of this, text amended to reflect the uncertainty. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:37, 1 February 2022 (UTC)


 * In 925 Æthelstan founded a community to take care of his shrine. Perhaps monastic/religious community or abbey/charterhouse? Perhaps "Edmund's shrine"?
 * Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:39, 1 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Who is Guthrum?
 * Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:56, 1 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Some of them have a legend that provides evidence that the Vikings experimented with their initial design. What is the connection between the Vikings and the coins?
 * Good spot, text now clarified to explain that Guthrum was a Viking. Amitchell125 (talk) 09:02, 1 February 2022 (UTC)


 * ...creation ... of the geographical ... area... Could a geographical area be created?
 * No—now sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 09:04, 1 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Unclear chronology: the establishment of the abbey is mentioned after creation of the Liberty of St Edmund in favor of the abbey.
 * Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 09:08, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

....More to come. Borsoka (talk) 09:20, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

in case they forgot, and if they want to get started on the above comments. Z1720 (talk) 21:36, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Until my remarks remain unnoticed, there is no point in continuing my review. :) Borsoka (talk) 01:16, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Strangely, I was awaiting for more review comments to come before starting work on them... No worries Amitchell125 (talk) 07:58, 1 February 2022 (UTC)


 * In section "Cult at Bury St Edmunds", the chronology is still unclear. I think the first three paragraphs should be consolidated in order to reflect the sequence of events: his cult promoted and flourished until 910, his shrine develops into a popular pilgrimage centre, his remains are translated to London, Cnut founds the abbey...
 * Thanks for your help here, section restructured accordingly. Amitchell125 (talk) 13:03, 3 February 2022 (UTC)


 * If his cult declined after 910, why was the abbey built under Cnut?
 * This will have been sorted when the above comment is addressed. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:37, 3 February 2022 (UTC)


 * "Basilica of St. Sernin" or "basilica of Saint-Sernin"?
 * Basilica, now sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:39, 3 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Chronology in section "Relics at Arundel" is unclear. Who is Cardinal Manning? Why did he receive relics in 1874? I assume the new shrine mentioned in the text is the Basilica of St. Sernin.
 * Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:17, 3 February 2022 (UTC)


 * What types of relics were given to Archbishop Herbert Vaughan?
 * The source only mentions "certain relics", now quoted as such in the text. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:36, 3 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Edmund's followers found his head but the villagers recovered it. The villagers appear in the story without introduction.
 * Sorted.Amitchell125 (talk) 11:34, 3 February 2022 (UTC)


 * I assume the "the three crowns" are depicted on Edmund's banners. They are mentioned without introduction.
 * Correct, now sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:31, 3 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Edmund's cult is analysed from comparative perspective in Gábor Klaniczay's monography about royal saints. You may want to use this book as well . Borsoka (talk) 03:48, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the find, it looks interesting. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:29, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

This are my last suggestions. Thank you for this interesting article. Good luck for the FAC process. Borsoka (talk) 02:08, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * He is thought to have been of East Anglian origin... This statement in the lead is not verified in the main text.
 * ...he was canonised by the Church... This statement in the lead is not verified in the main text.
 * Consider mentioning in the lead that he is also venerated in Toulouse.
 * In section "Cult at Toulose" consider first mentioning that a list mentioned Edmund's relics in 1425. Borsoka (talk) 02:08, 4 February 2022 (UTC)