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
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Should the article title not be Louisa Montagu, Duchess of Manchester? Craigy (talk) 21:38, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
Article is becoming an accrued mass of poor quality editsedit
Latest comment: 6 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion
This article needs the attention of an expert in this aspect of British history. Quoting from material at the Chatsworth website is not scholarly sourcing for a British historical subject. The 12 May 2017 IP edit, adding a prurient scene, while sourced, adds nothing to the "Career" section. And thereafter, line after line of material, purported to be factual, appears without sourcing in defiance of WP:REF (which allows for occasional, but not thorough-going exceptions). As it stands, the article is not encyclopedic (and not useful for as a student reading). 67.184.62.39 (talk) 22:57, 10 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
I have removed the prurient scene, which seems irrelevant, and supplied some references for other content from the apparently well-researched book by Vane. The article now seems to me to be in better shape, and I have removed the tag suggesting that it contains material which is "off topic". I agree that the Chatsworth website is hardly an impartial scholarly source, but it is likely to have been well-researched. I have therefore added more scholarly references, but left in the references to the Chatsworth website, as they are likely to be more generally accessible.Ntmr (talk) 13:41, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
(talk) 21:38, August 1, 2005 (UTC)