Talk:William Davys

February 2012
Thank you Chrisdoyleorwell for writing such an article. I have placed some citation needed templates onto the text because some of the facts are not covered by the current citations.

I have also placed the or template onto two sentences:
 * 1) It can scarcely have been a love marriage,
 * 2) On the other hand his refusal to give in to threats from the FitzGerald family suggests that he was a man of integrity, and whatever his personal religion seems to have been in favour of tolerance.

It may well be true that he did not marry for love, but unless you can find a source to support it you are drawing your own conclusions and that is a breach of WP:OR: "Even with well-sourced material, if you use it out of context, or to advance a position not directly and explicitly supported by the source, you are engaging in original research;" The same goes for the con clusions in the second sentence "he was a man of integrity" and "seems to have been in favour of tolerance".

In such cases you have to let the facts speak for themselves and let the reader draw their own conclusion. It is exactly the opposite of what gains kudos in academic research. Of course if you can find a source then you may write: but you can not draw such conclusions yourself. -- PBS (talk) 11:50, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * "Joan Smith stated he did not marry for love but...


 * Chrisdoyleorwell, thanks for cleaning up the article and addressing the point I raised. --PBS (talk) 22:38, 10 February 2012 (UTC)