Talk:Jean de Carrouges

Jean de Carrouges was one of the Warfare good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 1, 2007	WikiProject peer review	Reviewed
August 26, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
September 2, 2007	WikiProject A-class review	Approved
October 15, 2007	Good article reassessment	Kept
June 26, 2023	Good article reassessment	Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Military history: Biography / European / French / Medieval A‑class

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 articles

A

This article has been rated as A-class on the project's quality scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Military biography task force
	European military history task force
	French military history task force
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)

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

Biography: Military

	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 articles
	This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

France Mid‑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 articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Assessment

Wow, I'm putting this up for GA now, it should pass no problem, at first glance anyway. Wizardman 02:14, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Sweeps (Pass)

This article has been reviewed as part of

Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Regards, EyeSerene^TALK 17:56, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jean de Carrouges. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check

}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:07, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jean de Carrouges. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check

}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:30, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Should the content on Marguerite de Thibouville be spunoff to a new article?

Should there be a separate article on de Carrouges' wife, Marguerite de Thibouville?VR _talk 21:50, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vice regent, is she notable enough for a separate article, or is there a lot more to say about her than what's in this article? Acidsetback (talk) 06:32, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jager's book

Jager’s book, used as a crucial source for a significant section of this page, has been shown to be unreliable, and there is significant dissent among historians as to its historicity, and the inclusion of fictional or exaggerated elements for dramatic effect. Another source should be found to replace it, especially for the section on the rape of Marguerite. The popularization of the movie adaptation adds further dramatization that may not be wholly accurate or unbiased. Walshy231 (talk) 17:23, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I came here exactly to complain about the same thing: the facts presented in this article are mainly based on Jager's book. Therefore it should be mentioned that the article is about the fictional character Jean de Carrouges, and not the historical one. It might be worth to separate the two articles. 2607:F2C0:949E:6200:449F:9A02:FE24:3A9D (talk) 18:26, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

Jean de Carrouges

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result: Lack of improvement of issues with

GA criterion 2 below. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:05, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

GA from 2007. I want someone to take a look at this considering many section are tagged for either relying mostly on one source or possible factual inaccuracies in the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:46, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have an opinion about factual accuracy yet. I don't love that article relies heavily on a popular book rather than a scholarly one (no real peer review), plus original medieval sources (risky business to cite too credulously). But, I wasn't able to find anything else that I liked much better. We could try this diss on duels? Maybe this article?

Reading this interivew with the book's author offers useful context, I think, for how to interpret his book as a source: it likely represents some of the best research into the events in question, while remaining fundamentally an exercise in storytelling. His examples of 'imaginative' additions are things like 'there was a burst of cold air when the door opened,' which he says is a guess based on the fact that it was January. I don't think the book is inaccurate (or getting undue weight in the article) but I do think as a source it encourages lurid levels of detail. Although there are tags for inaccuracy, almost everything is cited; at most what might be needed is to foreground the specific sources more clearly (e.g., what comes from court records vs what comes from Froissart.)

So, I actually think the main problem with this article has to do with criteria 3b, rather than criteria-2 sourcing problems: that exhaustive blow-by-blow of the duel itself feels like "unnecessary detail" to me. Or maybe it feels off because of neutrality (criteria 4) problems. I think everything related to the duel should be cut down into one section, which takes a more encyclopedic approach of indicating key events (and their sources) more simply. To address all the main areas of its subject (3a) it might also be appropriate to have a set-apart section that describes the "reception" of the duel, aka, the way it was a go-to story of a miscarriage of justice, how it's been relitigated by historians, etc. Setting that section apart would also make it easier for the events of the duel itself to be more matter-of-fact, since the interpretation itself would happen elsewhere.

Overall, I slightly lean toward delisting in its current state, though I also think chopping the article down to something more encyclopedic would not be too onerous an undertaking. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 21:27, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.