This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following 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 Women in Religion Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of the Women in Religion WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Women in religion. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Women in ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject Women in ReligionTemplate:WikiProject Women in ReligionWomen in Religion Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The initial WP content of this article is from the article of the same title, written entirely by myself (up to this point in time) and originally posted on Citizendium. The empty outline headers and some of the other headers (the "Prometheus" ones) are perhaps unencyclopedic. I am aware of this but am not too concerned about it so much as I am concerned about completing the actual content of the article.

As I continue to complete the article on CZ, I will simultaneously post the added content to the article here on WP. JFPerry 18:45, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good job, thank you! Durova^Charge! 01:15, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article thing looks incomplete, as there were only the first four sessions and nothing more. --Angeldeb82 01:23, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is incomplete. I've been away (from both CZ and WP) for a few months. I'm back now and expect to move the article along significantly more rapidly now. JFPerry 21:05, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're doing an excellent job, keep up the work Phu2734 05:10, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions. This is a great article, but there were some problems with the headings I could not let stand, even for a day. The "Prometheus" references were entirely out of place and unexplained, and many of the headings included unnecessary word-dressing. I have rephrased these headings. Some of them appeared not to have been intended to receive any content, but only to mark events ("The inquisitor is summoned"); if these need to be reintroduced that should not be a problem when the content arrives. The thirteenth through fifteenth sessions obviously will need to be filled in at some point so I have left those. —ptk✰fgs 00:48, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind words about the article. I am no longer working on Citizendium, so I will probably be able to finish this article up a bit faster now. And thanks for everybody's patience with my slowness! JFPerry 01:43, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thirteenth session: Thursday, March 15, 1431

[edit] Fourteenth session: Saturday, March 17, 1431 (morning)

[edit] Fifteenth session: Saturday, March 17, 1431 (afternoon)

why aren't these done yet? would like to see it all completed :) 124.183.240.60 (talk) 06:54, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Agreed.. these still aren't done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.183.130.2 (talk) 13:36, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just as the trial was politically motivated, the "overturning" of the verdict was political - in fact more so. The overturning of the trial decision cannot therefore be said to be "thereby completely exonerating her". Even in modern courts a successful appeal merely means that a conviction was unsound, not that the person is innocent (or otherwise exonerated)101.98.175.68 (talk) 09:14, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this point. For example, though the trial was nullified, the status of Joan's voices was not clarified in the retrial. It wasn't until her beatification that the church decided that her voices were part of her divine mission. I'm going to change this. What is clearly the case is that the results of the trial were nullified. Wtfiv (talk) 23:26, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is meaningless without explaining how much this was worth in contempoorary spending terms, in contemporary ransom values, and in current terms. Could be $10 or $10 miliion... Rcbutcher (talk) 11:09, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Rouen halles vieuxmarche.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:15, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I removed a lot of English-language quotes that had citations from Latin or French-language sources, as well as other quotes from an English source that didn't align. Most of the material came directly from another work associated with a decades-old sock puppet issue, which particularly focuses advancing a particular view of why Joan wore men's clothes. See the following for details:

• Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ryn78
• User:Durova/Complex vandalism at Joan of Arc
• Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/AWilliamson
• Discussion of the work that is the source of the quotes can be found in the Article Review of the Joan of Arc Article

It's unfortunate that this article isn't more carefully worked out and cited. The trial certainly is interesting. Many of the key issues are mentioned, but need to be aligned with citations. Hopefully an editor will adopt it. Wtfiv (talk) 23:21, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]