Talk:Battle of Assandun

message: *"...particularly the Southampton nobles." Who are "the Southampton nobles"? The average well-read reader might be clueless as to what is so "Southampton" about these nobles. The wikilink to Southampton sheds no light.
*"The siege was in response to Edmund's reconquest of recently Danish-occupied Wessex, as well as conducting various indecisive offensives against Canute's army. " What is the subject of "conducting" in all this? 
*"raid-minded Danes" Someone's fallen asleep reading Keats.
*"Edmund risked travelling into the countryside, dominated by enemies and at risk of being attacked..." Insecure shifts of floating subject leave Edmund dominated by enemies.
*"superior Viking soldiers" Were they really? Or does this simply mean that there were more of them? the missing cliché is "superior numbers": is that desired?
*"a minority of pro-English primary sources claim" This needs a footnote to be intelligible. Which sources? And what do the majority of pro-English sources say? And by the way, which are the sources that are not "pro-English"?
*"Eadric (the traitor) was not a coward" The reader senses that something has been missed: Eadric has not yet been mentioned. Move the A-S Chronicle quotation up and expand upon it. 
*"A few years later saw the construction of St. Andrews memorial church in 1020 on the hill of the site of the Battle" Why then is there doubt as to the site: "the location is still debated"? whose debate? (Historians have debated the battle-site as being generally accepted as one of the two Essex villages, Ashdon and Ashingdon. The most recent and widely accepted research being Warwick Rodwell's paper that concludes the site was Ashdon. Dogfax (talk) 12:55, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Their was nothing much worth reading in the article back then. I think the idea of Eadric's deal with Cnut is only from the Encomium. So the majority do not support this. I don't see the problem with conducting, or the idea that danes in the early 11th Century were mainly raid-minded militarily, the idea that (back then) they were technologically and morale-wise superior soldiers (that's why vikings were initially successful). It seems that Eadric was a coward I have no qualms with that. I have nothing to dio with the location argument (and I don't recall "seeing", but I thiink that is in the Ashingdon article), I think their is a link to Encomium, and yes, as I have explained, the country was filled with dangerous Danes and English nobles. Southampton nobles is from Enconium.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.217.138.85 (talk) 01:10, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Semantic struggles for the reader

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 08:57, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: Since the location of the battle is not certain - Ashingdon or Ashdon - it seems more sensible to have an article name which makes no assumptions. Angus McLellan  (Talk) 16:18, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: Apologies: not sure if this is the right place to butt in, so once again apols if I have the etiquette wrong.  Perhaps this should go in "Semantic struggles".  The articles states: "Thus for the first time England became a single united kingdom, covering the same territory as it does today", which I think should mean that this is the first time we see a united England with much like today's boundaries.  But this sentence implies that this is the first time that England was a united kingdom, full stop.  This was clearly not the case - as a cursory reading of, say, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_the_Peaceable will show.  I would suggest a subtle rewrite? James Harvey (talk) 16:26, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Nature of the Kingdom of England

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Battle of Assandun. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110926225350/http://www.deremilitari.org/resources/sources/knytlinga.htm to http://www.deremilitari.org/resources/sources/knytlinga.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:00, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Substituted at 09:06, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Battle of Assandun. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141006145129/http://www.stmaryssaffronwalden.org/ashdon/history.htm to http://www.stmaryssaffronwalden.org/ashdon/history.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:02, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified