Wikipedia:Peer review/Justus/archive1

Justus
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to take it to FAC at some point and am looking for prose help, as well as help with finding any missing context that might be needed for a non-medievalist. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Ealdgyth - Talk 18:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Colin's comments: I know very little English history so amply qualify as a non-medievalist. Here's some initial comments from the first two parts. More later if this is helpful.
 * "was the fourth Archbishop of Canterbury, in England." The ", in England" jarrs. Is it necessary? We mention England a few words later, just in case anyone doesn't know where the Archbishop of Canterbury lives.
 * Deleted the "in England" Ealdgyth - Talk 19:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


 * "sent to England". I'm now wondering "from where?"
 * Clarified a bit .. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


 * "Gaul" may be worth wikilinking.
 * Done. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


 * "a native Italian". Do we need "native"? Do we know anything about where he was born or where he lived prior to coming to England?
 * Removed the native bit, and no, we know nothing nothing nothing. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


 * "books brought to England by Mellitus". I don't know who Mellitus is. I see it is wikilinked later but I need it here. I see from his article that he was believed to have come on the 601 mission too, which explains why he is being mentioned in connection with the books Justus travelled with. Can we give some context here?
 * Expanded a bit in the previous paragraph Ealdgyth - Talk 19:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Just noticed the article spells "traveled" with one "l". Is this written in US English? Just asking.
 * It should be in Brit English, but I usually have Malleus check over these types of articles because I'm a yank, thus catching all my mistakes (I've finally gotten "favour" down..) Ealdgyth - Talk 19:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not really following the point about "but examination of...one possible survivor". Why the "but"?
 * Clarified that a bit. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


 * "Along with the letter to Augustine" why "the letter", not "a letter"?
 * Should have been "a" oops. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


 * "the returning missionaries" I'm confused about "returning". I thought they came to Britain, not returned to Britain?
 * this paragraph came from another article (easier than retyping the whole big lot!) but a couple of typos obviously occurred. One of the 601 missionaries was actually returning (Laurence) but the others were new. Easier to just remove the "returning" from here, where it is unneccessary detail (the article it came from was Laurences, obviously). Ealdgyth - Talk 19:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


 * "force the conversion of his followers" Is "followers" the right word? Doesn't a king have "subjects"?
 * "Subjects" has a connotation that isn't quite correct in the early medieval period, especially here. The nobles, etc. were more "followers" than "subjects", as they could (and did) desert these kings (who were really not able to enforce their will on the peasants) so followers is a bit more correct. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Colin°Talk 22:46, 1 December 2009 (UTC) More:
 * "The King was also urged to destroy all pagan shrines" I'm wondering why this is a separate sentence rather than just run on from the previous as "and destroy all pagan shrines". Did that urging come from someone else, or was that behaviour not "like the Roman Emperor Constantine I"?
 * Nope, just a relic of how I put articles together, which is to throw up data in bits and pieces then rearrange as needed. Sometimes that means that sentences aren't always real long. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Did they succeed? Did the king convert his subjects and destroy the shrines?
 * We don't really know if he destroyed them all, nor do we have a lot of evidence about how many were converted. On reflection, I've removed the sentence about hte letter, as it's really peripheral to Justus. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)


 * "another of the missionaries who was Bishop of London" this reads like there were several missionaries who were "Bishop of London". Do you mean something like "who was another of the missionaries and who was Bishop of London"?
 * This got fixed in a rewrite connected to comments above... Ealdgyth - Talk 17:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Wikilink "Frankish"?
 * Done. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)


 * "He then consecrated Romanus as his successor" a little ambiguous if "he" is Justus or Boniface, particularly when Boniface's actions continue to be described in the following sentence with an "also" linking back.
 * Clarified it as Justus.


 * Do we know why he was regarded as a saint?
 * No clue. No sign of miracles being attributed to him like Mellitus, nor any other idea. Pre-congregation saints are ... shadowy. I've added that he's pre-congregation to the infoboxEaldgyth - Talk 17:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)


 * How long is the poem about him? If short, could it be reproduced here or linked to?
 * I have no idea. I have no idea if it's even been translated from Latin, honestly. If it has, it might still be copyrighted depending on the date of translation. For that matter, transcribing manuscripts may very well be copyrighted. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Can we wikilink "Reginald of Canterbury"
 * I've redlinked him. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)


 * What a shame we only know bits of his life and not even the year of his death.
 * We know more about him than some other Archbishops of Canterbury... see Feologild. And the ABCs are much better off than some of the other early medieval English bishops... Ealdgyth - Talk 17:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Colin°Talk 19:52, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks Colin, I'll get started on these shortly. Hopefully tomorrow.. it's been a rotten couple of days here. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:01, 3 December 2009 (UTC)