Wikipedia:Peer review/Hygeberht/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…I'd like to take it to FAC, but I'm concerned with two issues - one, prose, which is always a problem for me, and two, comprehensibility by the non-specialist in medieval history. I hope it makes sense to someone who isn't familiar with ecclesiastical history or with Anglo-Saxon history. I'd greatly appreciate any suggestions towards either or both of those concerns.
Thanks, Ealdgyth - Talk 22:53, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Ruhrfisch comments: I have read this several times and like it - sorry it has taken me so long to review. The prose seems pretty good to me, though I know you often have copyediting lined up, I will try to point out places the language could be improved. I think the main area for improvement is a bit more background to provide context.
- The lead is very concise - the article is 9865 B of readable prose, so WP:LEAD says one or two paragraphs in the lead is OK. If the article is expanded any, it might be worth expanding the lead to two paragraphs.
- Is there any reason not to link the Archbishopric of Canterbury in the lead?
- Since so much of Hygeberht's life was governed by Offa (both are mentioned three times by name in the lead), I think it would help to add a few sentences on Offa and the Kingdom of Mercia and the whole situation in what became England at the time. I think most readers will not know Kent was its own kingdom, or that England was not a unified kingdom at the time.
- I also wondered if one of Offa's coins (three are pictured in the Offa article) might be used as an image in this article?
- I read the article on the Kingdom of Kent but am not really sure what "the recently subjected Kentish kingdom" means. If it was subjected by an external force, why is there still a Kentish king, Egbert II?
- If two versions of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle say the Council of Chelsea was in 785, why does the article say it was in 787? What other sources say that it was actually in 787?
- I assume the other version of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle do not mention this council? Should that be stated explicitly somewhere?
- There is also an image of the first page of the Peterborough Chronicle in its article - could that be used in the Council of Chelsea section?
- Not clear what "at Rome" means in In 788 Hygeberht received a pallium, the symbol of an archbishop's authority, from Pope Hadrian I at Rome.[18] Assume it means Hygebehrt went to ROme to receive the pallium, but could also be seen as meaning that Hadrian was at ROme when he sent the pallium
- Is the year of Jænberht's death known? If so could it be added to .. though upon Jænberht's death, Hygeberht became the foremost prelate in England.[19]?
- Probably want to somehow identify ALcuin better - I thought he was the Archbishop of York. But, when Jænberht died, Hygeberht consecrated Jænberht's successor Æthelhard; though only after Offa consulted [noted scholar] Alcuin of York about proper procedure.[19]
- This raises the question of what the Archbishop of York thought of the new Archbishop(ric) of Lichfield. How did they interact? Or why was it only a Lichfield / Canterbury power struggle, and not a York / Lichfield struggle as well?
- As for language, I noticed the word "also" a afair amount - could probably be reduced in number
- Avoid passive voice if possible. Try to tighten the text ion places - so look for things like ... but it may have been because of a desire by Offa to supervise the entire southern church or it may have stemmed from an attempt by the archbishops of Canterbury to retain some authority over the province of Lichfield.[24] why not just "because of Offa's desire to supervise" or "stemmed from the archbishops of Caterbury's attempt to retain"
- I know there is a historical present tense, but to me it seems odd to have events that happened over 1000 years ago described with present tense verbs, especially when there are past tense consructions nearby By the time that Æthelhard held the Fifth Council of Clovesho, Hygeberht was no longer even named as a bishop, as he appears at that council as an abbot.[28] He remained an abbot until his death.[27]
- Please let me know when you take this to FAC.
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 06:20, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
PS given the recent concerns over copyright violations etc. I am now adding this to all of my peer reviwes. I know I am preaching to the choir here, but what do you think of the line?
- Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches for more details