User talk:50.53.44.69

Welcome!
I'm afraid, however, i have reverted your edit to Edward III of England; the rape of the Countess is likely a rumour put about by the French to abuse Edward, and should not, therefore, be thrust into the middle of this article. If it were based on a reliable source ~ if modern historians took it seriously enough to discuss and confirm their belief in it ~ then it would certainly belong, and likely already have a mention. Happy days ~ LindsayHello 17:14, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I see you have also done something similar in her article, too; for the reasons given above i'm going to revert that as well. Jean le Bel may have been contemporary, but he was of an opposing nationality and it was in his country's interests to degrade Edward's character, which certainly has the possibility of making him unreliable.  If you have a modern historian's perspective on this event, i invite you to mention it at either of the talk pages. Happy days ~ LindsayHello 17:19, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

There was no such thing as 'an opposing nationality' in the 14th century. You are bringing modern ideas of nationality to the discussion. Jean le Bel began fighting for the English in 1327 and fought FOR Edward III in the border war against the Scots. He was not someone who 'opposed' to the King he followed. That was why he was there and witnessed the results of the attack on the Countess. In fact, he excused it by talking about King Edward's love of the Countess. Le Bel is best known for his accuracy and his refusal to narrate events unless either he himself or his informant had witnessed them. He had no interest in nationality or politics. Pretending that there were no credible accounts of the rape does not make their existence go away. All you do is make Wikipedia look biased and less useful. You seem to know nothing about his chronicles. I suggest you do some research before deciding that he can be dismissed. 50.53.44.69 (talk) 01:00, 4 November 2021 (UTC)