Talk:Robert fitzRoger

Robert fitzRoger 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.
Review: February 20, 2022. (Reviewed version).

Biography

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

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

A fact from Robert fitzRoger appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 22 January 2014 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that although Robert fitzRoger owed his offices to the Chancellor William Longchamp, unlike most of Longchamp's appointees, fitzRoger retained those offices after Longchamp's fall from power?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2014/January. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Robert fitzRoger.

Wikipedia

DYK[edit]

Template:Did you know nominations/Robert fitzRoger Ealdgyth - Talk 15:20, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"fitzRoger"[edit]

"fitzRoger" is not a surname, as used in the current version of this article. -Wetman (talk) 11:16, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But it's commonly used as a functional surname by historians. It's perfectly fine to use these sorts of patronymics as surnames for Wikipedia's purposes. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:13, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 16:32, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Any reason why his children aren't listed in the infobox?
- I have no idea - the person who added the infobox didn't bother, I guess. -- Ealdgyth (talk) 17:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Should Eure be linked?
- Actually - that "lord of ..." clause was inserted here without a source ... and I just removed it. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"FitzRoger founded the monastery of Langley, Norfolk in 1195." Optional, but in UK English that would be FitzRoger founded the monastery of Langley in Norfolk in 1195.'
- Fixed. Another helpful addition from someone else. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Could we have an in line explanation of Michaelmas at first mention in the main article. Bracketed if you prefer.
- I added an explanatory footnote - as the short version was still way long. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Link sheriff.
Link Premonstratensian canons.
Link Langley.
- I linked to the abbey instead. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Orford Castle". Add 'in Suffolk'.
Link Newburn.
Link Whalton.
"one knight's fee". Explanation please.
- Linked. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gog the Mild (talk) 17:19, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

- I think I got all of the above. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"was an Anglo-Norman nobleman" I can't find this in the main article.
- This one is going to have to be "the sky is blue" type of thing. He held lands and offices in Anglo-Norman England and he wasn't clergy - so the fact that he held office makes him ipso-facto a nobleman in this time. "He was considered a baron" is pretty much the big clue there. Ealdgyth (talk) 19:35, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, yeah. I just want you to use the phrase "Anglo-Norman" in the main article. (Or remove it from the lead.) We both know it is a given, but the rules say that if you put it in the summary - the lead - you should put at least the same information in the article.

It's there now. Ealdgyth (talk) 20:04, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed