Wars of the Roses was a Warfare good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. 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.
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lancashire and Cumbria 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.Lancashire and CumbriaWikipedia:WikiProject Lancashire and CumbriaTemplate:WikiProject Lancashire and CumbriaLancashire and Cumbria articles
Wars of the Roses is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medieval Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Medieval Scotland 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.Medieval ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject Medieval ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject Medieval ScotlandMedieval Scotland articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics 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.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe 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.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history articles
The current lead image (a 20th century painting of a Shakespeare play), whilst nice, is probably more fitting for Henry VI, Part 1 than it is for a series of very real wars that took place in the 15th century. We could go for a depiction of any of the battles instead, or the collage of images that I have put forward, which are pictures of the four kings most involved in the fighting. Thoughts? Tim O'Doherty (talk) 22:37, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Tim. Did there end up being a discussion on this? While I don't have a problem with the new image (which is consistent with many other lead images on medieval/early modern warfare articles), I do think that the original worked very well as a symbolic representation of the conflict - capturing the essence of the conflict as a contest between two families and instantly evoking (and explaining) the name of the war itself (in spite of the fact that the actual scene is fictional of course). I'd prefer the original, but I'm all for further discussion. Otters B. Bothers (talk) 06:28, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Otters, apologies for the late response, but I haven't been monitoring this talk page all that often. No, there didn't end up being a discussion; I'd waited about 19 days and there hadn't been any input, so I decided to be WP:BOLD and make the change myself. In regards to the original picture: I didn't think a 20th century painting of a fictional scene was best suited for the lead image, and whilst a good artistic representation, not a very accurate or realistic one, and not a good thing to have in a fact-based encyclopaedia. On the whole, I'm not too picky about its replacement; we could choose a painting of a battle, or a picture of just one of the kings, or just the two rose symbols; I'm not bothered. But what I would say is that we definitely should remove, or at least move down the previous image. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 18:23, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Just seen this - we certainly need something better. Multiple images should be avoided wherever possible, and especially crushed into infoboxes. A near-contemporary battle pic would would be better there are a few of these. In fact there should be more in the article generally. The 3 from the Commons Category:Histoire de la rentrée victorieuse du roi Edouard IV (1471) - UGent HS236 seem to date from 1471. The illustrationsd throughout the article don't seem to have been looked at for years. Johnbod (talk) 00:38, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
@Tim O'Doherty:, @Johnbod: I'm going to have to agree with you both here. A contemporary or near-contemporary depiction of one of the battles does sound like the best option. Otters B. Bothers (talk) 11:55, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for this. Out of the ones you have suggested, I am supportive of either the image of the Battle of Tewkesbury or of the Battle of Bosworth Field. The former is very bright and clear, with little clutter, very fitting for a lead image and of course is of one of the most significant battles of the war. The latter, while non contemporary, is one of the most iconic depictions of the war and is of arguably its most famous and significant battle. Otters B. Bothers (talk) 00:03, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
@Otters B. Bothers: Just temporarily changed the lead image until we get further input on this; what do you think? I think the current one actually isn't too bad. Looks pleasant enough. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 14:23, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
Some war articles, such as the Hundred Years' War and Thirty Years' War, use one file that is a collage of other images, could the same be done here with the four monarchs or battle scenes? If using a single image then one from the Ghent manuscript seems the best option - and as Tewkesbury is already used elsewhere in the article my preference would be for Barnet. EdwardUK (talk) 16:30, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
This is where we came it, with a 5-monarch collage. Personally I loathe collages, especially in infoboxes, where they are too small; it seems others agree. This article is generally under-illustrated, so the common excuse of lack of space doesn't apply. I don't much like the roses either - they are better below, with explanations as to which is which. I think a battle scene from the Ghent manuscript is best - we should just use the best one, & then use the other lower down. I have a mild preference for Tewkesbury. There are also rather better later images than the ones we are now using, which could be spread around. Johnbod (talk) 16:50, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
Ok, done. Tewkesbury it is. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 17:49, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
Battle
Latest comment: 7 months ago3 comments3 people in discussion
This article started with a long description of one of the many battles in this war. I removed this content so that the aritcle now starts with the expected text consisely explaining what the "War of the Roses" was. Nick Beeson (talk) 17:18, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
Unfortunately you didn't revert far back enough - nor did User:Adakiko before you. Johnbod (talk) 17:43, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
Latest comment: 4 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Because, as we and the article itself knows, the roses weren't used as primary symbols by either house in this way. If they were, it would be marginal whether we should treat them like flags in the infobox—but since they aren't, I regretfully feel I have to remove them. Remsense诉 09:22, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
.svg)
