Talk:Siege of Kerak

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Concise wikified article with all the important facts included compared with a block of text concerned mainly with off-topic information? Im quite sure my edit was an improvement. cheerful regards --Tefalstar 19:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

What was off-topic? Adam Bishop 01:02, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Saladin was outraged and demanded vengeance. He invaded the northern part of the kingdom, and Guy of Lusignan, brother-in-law of King Baldwin IV, was sent out to meet him. Neither side could dislodge the other's position, and Saladin eventually withdrew, but Guy's hesitation, considered a sign of weakness, and his support for Raynald's brazen attempts to provoke Saladin caused Baldwin, who was suffering from leprosy, to depose him from the regency of the kingdom. Raymond III of Tripoli took over as regent, along with his allies among the nobility.

Irrelevant background on why Raymond took over the regency.

In 1185 Baldwin IV finally succumbed to his disease, and the kingdom passed to his nephew, the child Baldwin V. Baldwin V too soon died, and a succession crisis erupted between the supporters of Raymond III among the nobility on the one hand, and the supporters of Guy of Lusignan among the royal family on the other. Saladin seized this opportunity to invade the kingdom, and inflicted a devastating defeat on the Crusaders at the Battle of Hattin in 1187.

A paragraph about the Royal succession within an article about a siege.

The marriage continued while Saladin attacked the walls with nine mangonels. Both sides were already very familiar with each other through years of conflict and peace, and the siege was almost a friendly event. Humphrey's mother Stephanie of Milly sent some of the wedding feast to Saladin, and the sultan, who had no quarrel with anyone but Raynald, agreed not to target the wedding chamber of Humphrey and Isabella.

A very long and unreferenced way of saying Saladin wouldn't target the young couple.

I can't see the problem with cutting the fat and wikifying this thing. Prelude/Event/Aftermath, no story telling about chivalry, no backstory on the regency controversy and no paragraph on the King, his successor and a succession crisis. --Tefalstar 17:45, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I thought it was all relevant context to the event; well, except the story about the wedding, which is just a funny anecdote, but still part of the story. Adam Bishop 01:29, 3 October 2007 (UTC)