Talk:Treaty of Berwick (1639)

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Scotland Low‑importance

	Scotland portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Low‑importance

	England portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

To @A3ec6fYprq[edit]

Hi @A3ec6fYprq. I am aware that you had edited the Treaty of Berwick article. However, I do not know which parts you edited nor if you had included any sources since you had not mentioned it. The next time you edit the page, please type down which parts you edited and the sources you had included. Y33T 0321 (talk) 22:13, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @A3ec6fYprq, please disregard the earlier feedback. I had looked through the edits that you made in the Treaty of Berwick article and it looked better than the previous version with the information you had collected in the sources you added. Still, please type down about which parts you had edited since I was confused. Thank you. Y33T 0321 (talk) 23:36, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Great edits!! You've significantly improved this entry. Some small nitpicks:
· Add some internal links where possible - e.g., Scottish Church, James VI/I, Ireland, etc.
- Replace colloquial language: "a ton of" for "significant"
- First sentence under Reception of the War: please review; it doesn't quite make sense.
- Change header "Afterwards" to "Aftermath"

AFineClaret (talk) 17:05, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Small Edit[edit]

Hi! I'm here to suggest that you add a link to James VI and I, since he is a prominent figure in your article. Great edits! AlwaysSleepy4 (talk) 15:02, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Added on first mention in Background section. Thanks for the suggestion! MichaelMaggs (talk) 15:06, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Typo within article[edit]

There are only a couple of typos in the article and some words I think could be deleted. For example, using the term ‘a ton’ in the background section could be changed for something else. Also I believe you clarified many questions within the receptions of the war sections about why there wasn’t much support for the war. Mia1199 (talk) 17:46, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wording[edit]

Should we perhaps change the section labeled as "Afterwards" to "Aftermath"? 3ez r4ay (talk) 19:46, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]