Talk:Sieges of Berwick (1355 and 1356): Difference between revisions

Line 42: Line 42:

Here is the second sentence: “In 1355 the Second War of Scottish Independence had been under way for over 22 years, after a period of quiescence the Scots, encouraged by the French who were fighting the English in the Hundred Years’ War, assembled an army on the border.” I fail to understand how this became an FA class article. I am new here, open to correction, but I must share that I do not understand this.

Here is the second sentence: “In 1355 the Second War of Scottish Independence had been under way for over 22 years, after a period of quiescence the Scots, encouraged by the French who were fighting the English in the Hundred Years’ War, assembled an army on the border.” I fail to understand how this became an FA class article. I am new here, open to correction, but I must share that I do not understand this.

I go by the dictum Einstein gave: “You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother.”

dictum Einstein gave: “You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother.”

No grandmother will understand this. We need not consider the grandmothers everywhere, but the first paragraph, we might want to consider them too.

No grandmother will understand this. We need not consider the grandmothers everywhere, but the first paragraph, we might want to them .

This may be the cumulative result of well meaning efforts to improve and improve something that was already good at some point of time.

This may be the cumulative result of well meaning efforts to improve and improve something that was already good at some point of time.

	Sieges of Berwick (1355 and 1356) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article is currently on Wikipedia’s Main Page as Today’s featured article.
Current status: Featured article

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project’s importance scale.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Sieges of Berwick (1355 and 1356)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Iazyges (talk · contribs) 19:45, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria

• No DAB links Y
• No dead links Y
• No missing citations Y

Discussion

Prose Suggestions

Please note that almost all of these are suggestions, and can be implemented or ignored at your discretion. Any changes I deem necessary for the article to pass GA standards I will bold.

Lede

• They failed to carry the castle suggest They failed to seize the castle

Changed to “capture”.

• He was only prevented from worse depredations by his seaborne supplies not arriving due to bad weather. suggest He was only prevented from worse depredations because bad weather delayed his seaborne supplies#

Why? This moves the relevant bit of information – supplies – to the end of the sentence, and the problem with them – the delay – to after the storm. A reader is going to be momentarily wondering where this mention of a storm is leading.

Background

• Edward was never reconciled to the treaty believe this means that Edward was never a fan of it, perhaps Edward was never supportive of the treaty?

Pushing the sourcing slightly I have changed to “never accepted the validity of”.

• Encouraged by the French King suggest Encouraged by the French King, John II,

Good point. Done.

• Suggest mentioning and linking Auld Alliance somewhere.

Done.

Fall and recapture of Berwick town

• The Scottish nobles Thomas, Earl of Angus, and Patrick, Earl of March were these the same nobles mentioned in the prelude “but Scottish nobles, encouraged by the French, started gathering an army on the border.“? If so, suggest mentioning their names there.

No. Or, at least, they are not specified as so being and my OR feeling is that there were others and/or that these two weren’t senior enough to take a leading role in this.

• defended on the town (east) side what does this mean? It was on the eastern side of the town, or that the town was east of the bridge? Suggest defended on the eastern side of the town if the former is true.

It’s the latter, so reworded.

Aftermath

• On 20 January Balliol surrendered his nominal position as king of Scotland in favour of Edward, his overlord. who on earth is Balliol? Edward Balliol? Mention and link him in the Prelude and his claim, for context.

Oops. Thanks. Not really relevant to the subject of the article, and pretty unrelated to it, so removed.

Thanks Iazyges, I like your reviews – you have a good eye for the sloppiness that I let through. Your comments all addressed above. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:11, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 14:26, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the last paragraph, the first sentnece is “This was to prove the last time for 50 years that an English army entered Scotland.[44]” This took me a few beats to fully understand. Would it not be more clear to write “The English army did not enter Scotland for another 50 years”? Normally, I’d go ahead and change it, but the article is a recent FA and I don’t have access to the source so I don’t know the origional wording. BigChrisKenney (talk) 08:41, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Let me confess. I do not know much about the history of this part of the world.

But that was why I read this article. But however one tried, it remained confusing. Yes, one can visit the links and study the matter. But I did not, hoping to gather a preliminary understanding by reading the first two paragraphs on their own. I tried, tried and tried in vain.

Here is the second sentence: “In 1355 the Second War of Scottish Independence had been under way for over 22 years, after a period of quiescence the Scots, encouraged by the French who were fighting the English in the Hundred Years’ War, assembled an army on the border.” I fail to understand how this became an FA class article. I am new here, open to correction, but I must share that I do not understand this.

The dictum Einstein gave is useful: “You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother.”

No grandmother will understand this. We need not consider the grandmothers everywhere, but the first paragraph, we might want to give them some consideration.

This may be the cumulative result of well meaning efforts to improve and improve something that was already good at some point of time.

My humble thoughts. Postbox 2 (talk) 08:43, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]