Talk:Thomas (Robert) Cochrane

	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
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Scotland: Medieval Scotland Low‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics 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.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Medieval Scotland (assessed as Low-importance).

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Quality issues edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I have increasing concerns about the quality of this article. I have recently come across a copy of one of the references, "Scotland's Story" by Marshall, it describes itself as "a history of Scotland for boys and girls" and was written in 1905. I don't think we can treat a work like this as an important source for an encyclopedia article. PatGallacher 22:36, 12 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

In view of the concerns I raised earlier I propose to substantially reduce the size of this article, unless anyone objects. PatGallacher (talk) 20:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

I had the same concerns as those above dating back to 2007, but in 2021. For that reason I deleted a long paragraph of what I consider unhistorical and unbiographical material based on simply extracting Pitscottie's account. See diff at [[1]]. This material was subsequently restored with the comment "Please improve the encyclopedia by building it rather than deleting material considered too difficult for readers." I would argue that I didn't delete material I considered 'too difficult'. I deleted material which is non biographical and clearly established by reputable scholars to be fictional. Much as we might like colourful 16th century accounts, this is an encyclopedia, and they deserve no more prominence than a low quality hearsay-based account of Disraeli written in 2022 would deserve to receive major space in his biography. I haven't restored my edits, because life is too short, but if one is going to justify lengthy extracts from Pitscottie's account, you need to put it in context of all the other 16th century accounts and a proper assessment of their various merits and lack thereof.Benmoreassynt (talk) 20:13, 12 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Jesters edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Should Robert Cochrane be considered in the context of medieval jesters - a person from outside the established roles allowed to comment and advise? Jackiespeel (talk) 10:39, 13 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

No, because Cochrane was not a jester and nobody claimed he was. Benmoreassynt (talk) 20:12, 12 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Add topic