Talk:Second Battle of St Albans

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

Lovelace
Source? Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi  22:28, 20 January 2014 (UTC)


 * What do you mean? It's already in the article. HLGallon (talk) 23:05, 21 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I assumed that was a joke. I mean, using Trevor Royle as a reliable source. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi  12:56, 22 January 2014 (UTC)


 * 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)
 * 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)

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)
 * 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)
 * 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)
 * Do you have evidence that Trevor Royle is a historian not simply an author that writes about history? I found this
 * "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)
 * 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)