Talk:William Stubbs: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 14:58, 29 August 2009

Biography: Science and Academia Start‑class

	Biography portal 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 articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Page reads as if it were written by an excited schoolgirl discussing her favourite pop star, no pretense at objectivity; I don't have the technical know-how to flag this page for NPOV, hence this comment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.1.62.82 (talk) 15:27, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There have been suggestions by modern historians that his acceptance of medieval chroniclers at face value, especially in his treatment of William II, makes some of his work flawed. In the case of William Rufus, his disagreements with Archbishop Anselm over Gregorian reform mean that the writing of monastic chroniclers were likely to colour their views regarding his character and the historical value of his reign. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.115.211.92 (talk) 14:56, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 14:56, 29 August 2009 edit 87.115.211.92 (talk) No edit summary ← Previous edit		Revision as of 14:58, 29 August 2009 edit undo SineBot (talk \| contribs) Bots 2,553,283 edits m Signing comment by 87.115.211.92 - "" Next edit →
Line 4:		Line 4:
	Page reads as if it were written by an excited schoolgirl discussing her favourite pop star, no pretense at objectivity; I don't have the technical know-how to flag this page for NPOV, hence this comment. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures\|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/163.1.62.82\|163.1.62.82]] ([[User talk:163.1.62.82\|talk]]) 15:27, 25 May 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->		Page reads as if it were written by an excited schoolgirl discussing her favourite pop star, no pretense at objectivity; I don't have the technical know-how to flag this page for NPOV, hence this comment. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures\|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/163.1.62.82\|163.1.62.82]] ([[User talk:163.1.62.82\|talk]]) 15:27, 25 May 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

	There have been suggestions by modern historians that his acceptance of medieval chroniclers at face value, especially in his treatment of William II, makes some of his work flawed. In the case of William Rufus, his disagreements with Archbishop Anselm over Gregorian reform mean that the writing of monastic chroniclers were likely to colour their views regarding his character and the historical value of his reign.		There have been suggestions by modern historians that his acceptance of medieval chroniclers at face value, especially in his treatment of William II, makes some of his work flawed. In the case of William Rufus, his disagreements with Archbishop Anselm over Gregorian reform mean that the writing of monastic chroniclers were likely to colour their views regarding his character and the historical value of his reign. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures\|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/87.115.211.92\|87.115.211.92]] ([[User talk:87.115.211.92\|talk]]) 14:56, 29 August 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->