Featured articleTruce of Calais 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.
Featured topic starTruce of Calais is the main article in the Hundred Years' War, 1345–1347 series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 28, 2022.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 5, 2021Good article nomineeListed
October 29, 2021Featured topic candidatePromoted
November 8, 2021Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Truce of Calais/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Iazyges (talk · contribs) 03:52, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Criteria

GA Criteria

GA Criteria:

  • 1
    1.a checkY
    1.b checkY
  • 2
    2.a checkY
    2.b checkY
    2.c checkY
    2.d checkY
  • 3
    3.a checkY
    3.b checkY
  • 4
    4.a checkY
  • 5
    5.a checkY
  • 6
    6.a checkY
    6.b checkY

Discussion

No. Good spot. I have converted them both to "proper" footnotes. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:52, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Many thanks for them and for your copy editing.

Lede

Happy in principle to rephrase, but your suggeation giives the impression that the 1346 landing was the first major action of the war. It wasn't; Edward had campaigned in northern France before and in 1340 the Battle of Sluys (in Flanders, had killed 20,000 Frenchmen.
Good. Grammerly is an invention of the Devil and gives users a false sense that English has set rules and that only one applies in a given situation.
Done.
Rephrased.
We hve a debate around this every time it comes up (eg, see the FAC for Treaty of Guînes). They were emphatically not mercenaries, by the definition of the time, of today, or of any period in between. I don't insist on "adventurers", but "mercenaries" wilfully misleads a reader.

Background

I'm not sure that France had a "Great Council", at least not in 1337. That's why I linked to Conseil du Roi. A (very) quick skim of my sources doesn't turn this phrase up. Do you have some that do?

Siege of Calais

Nice. Done.
Why go all sexist? Families emigrated. It is clear that quite a few English (and Flemish) women also rellocated.
I have no idea why they were there. Thanks for sorting.

Philip VI

Means something a little different and slightly inaccurate, but I can see how it is more accessible, so done. I assume you are happy with "their" twice in six words?

John II

Rephrased

Treaty of Guînes

That's not grammatical. I don't mind changing this - althoufgh I don't see anything wrong with it - so do you have an alternate suggestion?
Yeah. I struggled with this. Rephrased.

Notes

Done.
Hi Iazyges and thanks for the review, the copy edit, the pass and your thoughtful sugestions above. The latter all responded to. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:57, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

27 September[edit]

The date of 27 September in the infobox and lead is nowhere sourced and contradicted by 28 September in the body. Wehwalt (talk) 14:32, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wehwalt, an embarrassing typo which somehow has never been picked up. Until you brought your eagle eyes to bear. Corrected. Thank you. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:58, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]