Talk:Angevin kings of England

The good article status of this article is being reassessed by the community to determine whether the article meets the good article criteria. Please add comments to the reassessment page.

^{Date: 01:57, 2 December 2024 (UTC)}

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Angevin kings of England article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 3 months

Angevin kings of England has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 26, 2014	Good article nominee	Listed
November 7, 2014	WikiProject A-class review	Not approved
November 7, 2014	WikiProject A-class review	Not approved
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on July 5, 2014. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Angevins* are considered by many historians to be the distinct Royal House that provided the English monarchs Henry II, Richard I and King John?*
Current status: Good article

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

France Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France 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.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Middle Ages Mid‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Medieval

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

Associated task forces:
/
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)

Additional information:
/
	This article has failed an A-Class review.

Biography: Royalty and Nobility

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility (assessed as Low-importance).

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Miniapolis, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 10 July 2014.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 1 section is present.

GA Reassessment

Latest comment: 16 days ago7 comments2 people in discussion

Angevin kings of England

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result pending

I have only briefly reviewed the article but I found at least two cases of plagiarism, and several cases of unverified claims, so the article does not meet GA2c and GA2d. Borsoka (talk) 02:12, 2 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Plagiarism:

The adjective Angevin is especially used in English history to refer to the kings who were also counts of Anjou...

"...any of the Plantagenet kings of England, especially those who were also counts of Anjou..." [1] p. 59

As far as it is known, there was no contemporary name for this assemblage of territories, which were referred to—if at all—by clumsy circumlocutions such as ….

"...there was, so far as we know, no contemporary name for this assemblage of territories. When anyone wanted to refer to them there were only clumsy circumlocutions available” (Gillingham 2001, p. 2)

Unverified claims

References 26, 61, 83, and 84 do not verify the relevant texts in the article. Borsoka (talk) 02:12, 2 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

As I said in the GAN discussion, I do not think a phrase as basic as "were also [job descriptor]" can be considered plagiarism. There's probably one other way to rephrase that at which point it becomes so basic as to not be a copyright issue. Otherwise, I have no comment on the points raised. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:10, 2 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

I have no access to the sourcing so I can't fix any ref issues but I attempted to rephrase the second one. Is that satisfactory on that front? PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:16, 2 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

I think the article needs a comprehensive review taking into account that Norfolkbigfish's relaxed approach towards copyvio is well documented. Borsoka (talk) 03:23, 2 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

If you want to propose we Doug Coldwell him, feel free to take that to ANI, but that's beyond the scope of any one review given he has several. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:24, 2 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I am close to take them to ANI but instead I give them (again) a last chance. I do not want to get rid of them, but to persuade them to start to improve WP instead of disrupting it with plagiarism, unverified statements and typos. Borsoka (talk) 03:28, 2 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Add topic