Talk:Oliver Cromwell

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleOliver Cromwell was one of the History 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.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 14, 2006Good article nomineeListed
December 31, 2006WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
November 4, 2009Good article reassessmentKept
July 7, 2011Good article reassessmentDelisted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on December 16, 2004, December 16, 2005, December 16, 2006, December 16, 2007, December 16, 2008, December 16, 2009, December 16, 2012, December 16, 2015, and December 16, 2018.
Current status: Delisted good article


Appendices[edit]

After the body of the article is the appendices.
  • Further reading section: This section currently has five subsections with 57 entries. MOS:FURTHER states, An optional bulleted list, usually alphabetized, of a reasonable number of publications that would help interested readers learn more about the article subject. While a "reasonable number" could be subjective I highly doubt that a reasonable person would argue against 57 as being far too many.
  • Citation styles: Publications listed in further reading are formatted in the same citation style used by the rest of the article
  • Links: Any links to external websites included under "Further reading" are subject to the guidelines described at Wikipedia:External links.
  • External links: Sometimes things tend to grow and sometimes they can grow too much. There are nineteen entries in the "External links". Three seems to be an acceptable number and of course, everyone has their favorite to add for four links.
The problem is that none is needed for article promotion.
  • ELpoints #3) states: Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links.
  • LINKFARM states: There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate.
  • ELMIN: Minimize the number of links. --
  • ELCITE (if applicable): ...access dates are not appropriate in the external links section. Do not use {{cite web}} or other citation templates in the External links section. Citation templates are permitted in the Further reading section. +
  • WP:ELBURDEN: Disputed links should be excluded by default unless and until there is a consensus to include them.
The second paragraph of the External links lead states, Some acceptable external links include those that contain further research that is accurate and on-topic, information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail, or other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article for reasons unrelated to its accuracy.
Normally I would just trim some (or many) and let a discussion and consensus follow. This page in a nutshell: External links in an article can be helpful to the reader, but they should be kept minimal, meritable, and directly relevant to the article. Any that can be used as a reference should be incorporated into the article. -- Otr500 (talk) 11:06, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Terrible Sources Used vis a vis Ireland[edit]

Can someone explain to me why this article (which, by the way, I am not able to directly edit) cites this [1] undergraduate thesis for anything? The author is so unfamiliar with Ireland that he thinks that the "Ó" in Micheál Ó Siochrú's name is a middle initial (see page 5) and refers to an English Invasion of Ireland in 1117.

Dregne, the undergraduate who wrote the thesis, seems to have largely drawn his argument from Tom Reilly, an obsessive non-academic "historian" from Drogheda who worships Cromwell and whose theories are dismissed by real academics.[2] This article doesn't seem to cite Reilly directly however, which is a step up from the "Historical Debate" section of the Cromwellian conquest of Ireland which gives that amateur pride of place. DuxEgregius (talk) 20:50, 27 April 2023 (UTC) DuxEgregius (talk) 20:50, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

Semi-protected edit request on 24 August 2023[edit]

<ref>Lauder-Frost, Gregory, F.S.A.Scot., "East Anglian Stewarts" in The Scottish Genealogist, Dec.2004, vol.LI, no.4., pp. 158–9. ISSN 0330-337X</ref> The ISSN is actually 0300-337X, as evidenced by the fact that 0330-337X has an invalid checksum (the last digit would have to be a 3, which is already taken by a title in Tunisia). 2603:8001:4542:28FB:C42A:86EF:90BA:97A3 (talk) 01:39, 24 August 2023 (UTC) 2603:8001:4542:28FB:C42A:86EF:90BA:97A3 (talk) 01:39, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for spotting this. GarethAd (talk) 08:51, 24 August 202390.250.142.122 (talk) 21:20, 20 November 2023 (UTC) (UTC)[reply]

Please edit "Episcopalean" to "episcopalean".[edit]

Please edit "Episcopalian" to "episcopalian".

Use of the capital creates ambiguity with the Episcopalian Church - i.e. the Anglican Church in the US - esp for readers from the US.

Current code:- It was designed to check the powers of the executive, to set up regularly elected parliaments, and to restore a non-compulsory Episcopalian settlement.

Proposed code:- It was designed to check the powers of the executive, to set up regularly elected parliaments, and to restore a non-compulsory episcopalian settlement. 193.116.206.35 (talk) 05:14, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done now, thanks. Moons of Io (talk) 08:02, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Biased lede[edit]

The phrase "the brutality of his campaign in Ireland" should be removed. Modern historians have argued the atrocities happened under the direction of other generals, after Cromwell had returned to England. (2A00:23C5:C416:A601:8D10:7F9F:F317:B65F (talk) 11:54, 17 March 2024 (UTC))[reply]