Talk:William Neville, Earl of Kent

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Dunarc in topic Concluding paragraph - a little subjective?
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on William Neville, 1st Earl of Kent. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:41, 23 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Conversion rates

edit

In the 'Loyalty to the Crown' section could a more recent 'equivalence rate' than 2005 be provided. Jackiespeel (talk) 10:24, 20 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Concluding paragraph - a little subjective?

edit

I am not sure that the last paragraph works. It states "William Neville is an underrated figure in the rise to power of the Yorkist regime. More successful as a military leader than the more famous Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick, his reputation is summed up in Goodman's words: "No other veteran of the Anglo-French Wars won such distinction in the Wars of the Roses"." Other than the reference to the Goodman quote (which does not have a citation to identify its origin) there is nothing to back up the dramatic claim being made about William Neville's significance. While the role and abilities of Warwick are undoubtedly up for debate, many historians still see him as successful in military terms, and as it stands this seems to be a rather subjective comment to imply he was less successful than his Uncle. I am not against discussion of William Neville's abilities and importance, but I think there needs to be more evidence and other points of view brought in, otherwise this looks a bit impartial (though I am sure that was not the intention of any editor). Dunarc (talk) 15:58, 31 December 2020 (UTC)Reply