Talk:Second Battle of St Albans

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hertfordshire, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.HertfordshireWikipedia:WikiProject HertfordshireTemplate:WikiProject HertfordshireHertfordshire articles

Military history: British / European / Medieval

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)

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.

Untitled[edit]

I removed the link at the bottom of the page because it no longer works. ssmith165

Lovelace[edit]

Source? _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 22:28, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? It's already in the article. Royle, Trevor (2009). The Road to Bosworth Field. Little, Brown. p. 274. ISBN 978-0-316-72767-9. HLGallon (talk) 23:05, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I assumed that was a joke. I mean, using Trevor Royle as a reliable source. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 12:56, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Debunking any historian requires sources as valid as those for any other position on Wikipedia. Please do not allow personal opinions to intrude. HLGallon (talk) 22:07, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Be warned, I consider that a personal attack; and you aware well aware of the consequences of that. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 09:49, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am perfectly aware of the consequences of personal attacks. However, I consider that the sneering tone of your remarks earlier on this thread and especially your baseless accusation of vandalism to the article to be quite as offensive. If you consider I have made a personal attack, I suggest you take the matter to the administrators. Expect a robust response. There may be issues with Royle's reliability, but it could have been dealt with in a more rational manner. HLGallon (talk) 20:25, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Remember: We would like criticism based on content, not editor. You have (so far, consistently) not addressed the actual issue of sources. Also your view of my 'sneering tone' is your interpretation; nothing more. So I repeat: not only WP:NPA, WP:AGF etc, all of which you are aware of, but also [WP:THREAT]]. Good luck. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 20:36, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that when presented with a cite involving Royle, assuming "that was a joke" is not addressing content, but editor (myself). I think many would support that interpretation. Nor does your accusation of vandalism assune good faith on my part. (I note by the way that your reversion of my "vandalism" has changed only three of my words, replacing adjectives with direct quotes, both versions are uncontroversial.) I have made no threats. I have stated that if you chose to take this matter to the administrators, I would defend myself vigorously in the same arena. HLGallon (talk) 21:01, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have evidence that Trevor Royle is a historian not simply an author that writes about history? I found this[1]

"Trevor Royle is a broadcaster and author specializing in the history of war and empire with a score of books to his credit. His previous books include Civil War: The Wars of Three Kingdoms, Crimea: The Great Crimean War 1854-1856, a New York Times Notable Book, and Lancaster Against York. He is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, a regular commentator on defense matters and international affairs for the BBC and an Editor at The Sunday Herald. He lives in Edinburgh, Scotland."

I have not found any information stating Trevor Royle has any education nor academic standing as a historian. --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:24, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. In fact, more indicative of his value here than anything is that he is- a Journalist. He is 'not a reliable source; he is an Alison Weir-type. If you have actually read his book, you will know that he gives no footnotes or citations. Historians are not so quick to give credence to his claims as some editors here, perhaps. I have a fancy now to go through this and other articles that are tainted with Royle and 100% replace him with reputable sources. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 09:49, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]