Talk:Robert Burnell

	Robert Burnell 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.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 5, 2015.
Article milestones Date Process Result February 19, 2008 Good article nominee Listed July 14, 2008 Peer review Reviewed March 14, 2009 Peer review Reviewed November 14, 2010 Featured article candidate Promoted Current status: Featured article

This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

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 Somerset Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Somerset, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Somerset 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.SomersetWikipedia:WikiProject SomersetTemplate:WikiProject SomersetSomerset Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Anglicanism Low‑importance Robert Burnell is part of WikiProject Anglicanism, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AnglicanismWikipedia:WikiProject AnglicanismTemplate:WikiProject AnglicanismAnglicanism Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Middle Ages Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Christianity Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Shropshire Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shropshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Shropshire 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.ShropshireWikipedia:WikiProject ShropshireTemplate:WikiProject ShropshireShropshire Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

1. Well-written: I've corrected a few minor infelicities. The lede says that he was "twice unsuccessfully elected to become Archbishop of Canterbury". Wouldn't it be better to say that he was successfully elected (or simply elected)? He won the election, after all; his failure to be elevated was due to papal disapproval. Also, when it says the holders of the Great and Privy Seals were not in conflict, who actually held the Privy Seal at this time? Do we know?

Hm.. Handbook of British Chronology says this about the Privy Seal during this time "In the later years of Edward I it was normally held by the controller of the wardrobe, but the lords ordainers insisted in 1311...". During Burnell's time those were: Philip Willoughby from the accession to 18 Oct 1274. Then Thomas Bek, (later Bishop St David's) until 20 Nov 1280, then William Louth (later Bishop of Ely) until 12 May 1290, then Walter Langton, as acting from 12 May, and appointed from 20 Nov 1290 until 1295. Let me dig through Prestwich though...and get back to you on this one. Ealdgyth | Talk 21:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's fine. Be nice to overhaul Wardrobe (government) sometime to bring it through its abolition in...let's see...1782, but I don't really have the resources for that, vide infra. Choess (talk) 22:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. Factually accurate and verifiable: Well-sourced, no problems I can see.
2. Broad in its coverage: seems wide-ranging, but while looking up information about the Privy Seal, The History of English Law before the time of Edward I speaks of Chancery ceasing to be a peripatetic office following the king about this time: "it seems probable that Chancellor Burnel made some noteworthy change in 1280." Perhaps a search under the alternate spelling of his name would turn up more details? It might also be well to mention some of the legal reforms passed during Burnell's tenure as Chancellor, such as the statutes of Quia emptores and Quo warranto.

I don't have that book, but I have a number of others on governance and such of this time (a few I've only recently acquired so they didn't get mined for this article) Let me do some digging... Ealdgyth | Talk 21:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That book and the old DNB refer to Annales de Waverleia and Annales de Wigornia in Annales Monastici, ii. 393, iv. 477 as primary sources. Don't know if that's any help. My launch into Real Life has cut me off from most of my academic resources. Choess (talk) 22:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I look at the emendations, that's fine for present purposes, I think. Choess (talk) 22:29, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. Neutral: no visible problems.
2. Stable: no edit wars under way.
3. Illustrated: the image of Acton Burnell Castle is sufficient, although a seal or coat-of-arms for Robert would be nice if any exists. I wouldn't consider that necessary for GA, though.

I'm horrid on images, I'll admit. I haven't found a picture of him yet, or of a tomb or a seal that's free use. The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography article doesn't even have a picture of a seal or anything, nor does that article list any likenesses.Ealdgyth | Talk 21:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about it for GA. A pass through Google Books gives a snippet from a Heraldry Society publication, so one of his seals must survive somewhere. I've found a reference for his arms as Argent, a lion rampant sable. Choess (talk) 22:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know what can be done about points 1 and 3, and I think it will be ready for GA. Choess (talk) 21:29, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Passed for GA

Congratulations to all the contributors to this featured article. You deserve a lot of applause, recognition and appreciation. What a wonderful article.

  Bfpage |leave a message  11:30, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]