This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Richard of York, 3rd Duke of York article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'd like to renovate this page, as I think it doesn't do justice to one of the most important characters of mid fifteenth-century England. However, my only contribution to Wikipedia so far is the page on William Neville, so I've never updated any else's work.
If anyone would like to give me any advice or make any comments on how to do this without offending anyone, I'd be grateful.
Thanks
Thewiltog 21:45, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
I've made a start on the new page - I've created a sub-page from my home page called Richard of York. Please have a look and feel free to make comments or suggestions.
Thewiltog 17:35, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
I've completley replaced the previous article with a new one. Mostly, I've just expanded on what was in the earlier one, but below are the points where I've made fundamental changes
According to Johnson (page 1), York was born on 22nd September, not the 21st. Johnson points out the origin of the error
The only evidence that York started using the name Plantaganet in 1448 is Gregory's Chronicle (Wolfe, chapter 2, footnote 26). Even if this is true, York's actions at this time do not suggest he was claiming the throne
He succeeded to the title Duke of York from his Uncle in 1415. His father's attainder did not prevent this. (Johnson, page 1)
York wasn't present at the Battle of Northampton - he was still in Ireland. It cannot be said with certainty that Warwick was following York's orders at this time, so it is not accurate to say these were York's forces.
Thewiltog
16:11, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
The section of Saint Albans starts with the quote "If Henry's insanity was a tragedy, his recovery was a national disaster". Who said that? We should clarify this since this opinion has to be clearly attributed to avoid POV issues.-- RR' ( talk) 11:36, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
The quote is from Storey "The End of the House of Lancaster" - first sentence of chapter XII —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thewiltog ( talk • contribs) 20:57, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Quote: Henry's attempts at reconciliation between the factions divided by the killings at St Albans reached their climax with the Loveday on 24 March, 1458.
According to the article of Loveday, I do not understand what it means here. The phrase "WITH THE Loveday" makes it unlike a name of a certain place. Heinrich ⅩⅦ von Bayern ( talk) 13:07, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
The link is wrong- it takes you to the name Loveday and I suggest we need a Page for Love Day- some kind of day in which reconciliation can take place or something.
IceDragon64 ( talk) 22:10, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Cecily's Wikipedia page says buried with Richard at Church of St Mary and All Saints. Richard's Wikipedia page says he was buried at Pontefract Castle.
Which is it?
Mellie107 ( talk) 07:03, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
English Monarchs ( http://www.englishmonarchs.co.uk/fotheringhay.html) says Edward IV moved his father's remains to the Church of St Mary & All Saints,, Fotheringhay, from Pontefract:
So both Pontefract & St Mary's are correct, except for the fact that Richard was only interred at the former for 16 yrs. Edward's brother Edmund, Earl of Rutland, who was also killed at Wakefield, was buried with their father & removed to St Mary's at the same time. There is a photo of detail from Cecily & Richard's tomb included at the website. I've always found English Monarchs to be a good source. Does it suit WP standards is the question. If it does, I can add (& source) the info to Richard's article, & I can add the page there as an external link. Is there a template for something akin to a quote box? I think Chester Herald's description of the funeral is worthy of mention in Richard's article. Any objections to an addition? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScarletRibbons ( talk • contribs) 00:51, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
The current article contains:
The second paragraph is written as if Mortimer and March are different people; of course he inherited the March lands and the Mortimer claim simultaneously when Edmund Mortimer died.
However, I don't have any good reference works on Richard of York so before I amend the page and possibly introduce new errors, does anyone know:
By all means someone else go ahead and amend this section. Zipperdeedoodah ( talk) 18:34, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Richard of York, 3rd Duke of York. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:52, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Apart from the inclusion of a daughter "Joan", who was demonstrably invented about thirty years ago, in the genealogy, I see no problems. I don't know how to correct www.royalist.info, or I would. The contemporaneous poem "Richard liveth yet", for instance, doesn't mention her. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smlark ( talk • contribs) 19:58, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
How was Richard Prince of Wales? GoodDay ( talk) 13:42, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
The 8th child in the list of his children is John of York and as of the date and time of this talk-page edit it is saying he lived until 1512. That is a bit unlikely because he would have been given a Title of Nobility like his brothers. There are Internet sites that say he died in the year after he was born. Why wouldn't we have more information about him in WikiP if he lived for such a long time? If he was born with a profound mental incapacity and that's why he has no title or bio then just say so. 2603:7000:9900:2CAF:1C64:8308:33BC:E2D6 ( talk) 13:37, 1 February 2021 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson
"All future English monarchs would come from the line of Henry VII and Elizabeth, and therefore from Richard of York himself." Although (to my limited knowledge) this is established, to a general reader it may imply a rather direct line of descent - perhaps it would benefit from a qualifying phrase? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diomedes Agonistes ( talk • contribs) 18:08, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
When did Richards son Edward take over the leadership of the house of york 95.145.221.147 ( talk) 12:23, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
The site is using an incorrect painting of Richard III, which is not accurate. Since his DNA was tested in 2022, we know for a fact that his hair was not black and neither were his eyes.
His DNA has proven that he had blue eyes and blond or dark blond. There are many articles about this. I think the painting below would be more accurate.\ https://www.cnn.com/2014/12/02/world/europe/richard-iii-dna-hair-eyes/index.html 2600:8803:E508:9100:6817:BE5:177B:F7D9 ( talk) 16:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
The statement at the start of the Protector of the Realm, 1453–1455 section that "the marriage of the newly ennobled Edmund Tudor, 1st Earl of Richmond, to Margaret Beaufort provided for an alternative line of succession" seems dubious to me. Edmund Tudor was the half brother of King Henry VI, but on the maternal side - he was not descended from any King of England and as such would not have been acceptable to many others who had a better claim or the majority of the nobility. Margaret Beaufort was indeed a descendent of Edward III of England via John of Gaunt, and this is what their son King Henry VII would later use to claim to be the Lancastrian heir. However a) they did not marry until 1455 b) Until 1471 several other male Beauforts would have seen themselves as having better claims than York including her cousins the 3rd and 4th Dukes of Somerset (and also the heirs of Catherine of Lancaster had an even better claim than the Beauforts). It was only really after 1471 that Henry Tudor became the obvious alternative to the York line. Dunarc ( talk) 22:48, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Richard of York, 3rd Duke of York article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'd like to renovate this page, as I think it doesn't do justice to one of the most important characters of mid fifteenth-century England. However, my only contribution to Wikipedia so far is the page on William Neville, so I've never updated any else's work.
If anyone would like to give me any advice or make any comments on how to do this without offending anyone, I'd be grateful.
Thanks
Thewiltog 21:45, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
I've made a start on the new page - I've created a sub-page from my home page called Richard of York. Please have a look and feel free to make comments or suggestions.
Thewiltog 17:35, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
I've completley replaced the previous article with a new one. Mostly, I've just expanded on what was in the earlier one, but below are the points where I've made fundamental changes
According to Johnson (page 1), York was born on 22nd September, not the 21st. Johnson points out the origin of the error
The only evidence that York started using the name Plantaganet in 1448 is Gregory's Chronicle (Wolfe, chapter 2, footnote 26). Even if this is true, York's actions at this time do not suggest he was claiming the throne
He succeeded to the title Duke of York from his Uncle in 1415. His father's attainder did not prevent this. (Johnson, page 1)
York wasn't present at the Battle of Northampton - he was still in Ireland. It cannot be said with certainty that Warwick was following York's orders at this time, so it is not accurate to say these were York's forces.
Thewiltog
16:11, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
The section of Saint Albans starts with the quote "If Henry's insanity was a tragedy, his recovery was a national disaster". Who said that? We should clarify this since this opinion has to be clearly attributed to avoid POV issues.-- RR' ( talk) 11:36, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
The quote is from Storey "The End of the House of Lancaster" - first sentence of chapter XII —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thewiltog ( talk • contribs) 20:57, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Quote: Henry's attempts at reconciliation between the factions divided by the killings at St Albans reached their climax with the Loveday on 24 March, 1458.
According to the article of Loveday, I do not understand what it means here. The phrase "WITH THE Loveday" makes it unlike a name of a certain place. Heinrich ⅩⅦ von Bayern ( talk) 13:07, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
The link is wrong- it takes you to the name Loveday and I suggest we need a Page for Love Day- some kind of day in which reconciliation can take place or something.
IceDragon64 ( talk) 22:10, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Cecily's Wikipedia page says buried with Richard at Church of St Mary and All Saints. Richard's Wikipedia page says he was buried at Pontefract Castle.
Which is it?
Mellie107 ( talk) 07:03, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
English Monarchs ( http://www.englishmonarchs.co.uk/fotheringhay.html) says Edward IV moved his father's remains to the Church of St Mary & All Saints,, Fotheringhay, from Pontefract:
So both Pontefract & St Mary's are correct, except for the fact that Richard was only interred at the former for 16 yrs. Edward's brother Edmund, Earl of Rutland, who was also killed at Wakefield, was buried with their father & removed to St Mary's at the same time. There is a photo of detail from Cecily & Richard's tomb included at the website. I've always found English Monarchs to be a good source. Does it suit WP standards is the question. If it does, I can add (& source) the info to Richard's article, & I can add the page there as an external link. Is there a template for something akin to a quote box? I think Chester Herald's description of the funeral is worthy of mention in Richard's article. Any objections to an addition? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScarletRibbons ( talk • contribs) 00:51, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
The current article contains:
The second paragraph is written as if Mortimer and March are different people; of course he inherited the March lands and the Mortimer claim simultaneously when Edmund Mortimer died.
However, I don't have any good reference works on Richard of York so before I amend the page and possibly introduce new errors, does anyone know:
By all means someone else go ahead and amend this section. Zipperdeedoodah ( talk) 18:34, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Richard of York, 3rd Duke of York. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:52, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Apart from the inclusion of a daughter "Joan", who was demonstrably invented about thirty years ago, in the genealogy, I see no problems. I don't know how to correct www.royalist.info, or I would. The contemporaneous poem "Richard liveth yet", for instance, doesn't mention her. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smlark ( talk • contribs) 19:58, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
How was Richard Prince of Wales? GoodDay ( talk) 13:42, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
The 8th child in the list of his children is John of York and as of the date and time of this talk-page edit it is saying he lived until 1512. That is a bit unlikely because he would have been given a Title of Nobility like his brothers. There are Internet sites that say he died in the year after he was born. Why wouldn't we have more information about him in WikiP if he lived for such a long time? If he was born with a profound mental incapacity and that's why he has no title or bio then just say so. 2603:7000:9900:2CAF:1C64:8308:33BC:E2D6 ( talk) 13:37, 1 February 2021 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson
"All future English monarchs would come from the line of Henry VII and Elizabeth, and therefore from Richard of York himself." Although (to my limited knowledge) this is established, to a general reader it may imply a rather direct line of descent - perhaps it would benefit from a qualifying phrase? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diomedes Agonistes ( talk • contribs) 18:08, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
When did Richards son Edward take over the leadership of the house of york 95.145.221.147 ( talk) 12:23, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
The site is using an incorrect painting of Richard III, which is not accurate. Since his DNA was tested in 2022, we know for a fact that his hair was not black and neither were his eyes.
His DNA has proven that he had blue eyes and blond or dark blond. There are many articles about this. I think the painting below would be more accurate.\ https://www.cnn.com/2014/12/02/world/europe/richard-iii-dna-hair-eyes/index.html 2600:8803:E508:9100:6817:BE5:177B:F7D9 ( talk) 16:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
The statement at the start of the Protector of the Realm, 1453–1455 section that "the marriage of the newly ennobled Edmund Tudor, 1st Earl of Richmond, to Margaret Beaufort provided for an alternative line of succession" seems dubious to me. Edmund Tudor was the half brother of King Henry VI, but on the maternal side - he was not descended from any King of England and as such would not have been acceptable to many others who had a better claim or the majority of the nobility. Margaret Beaufort was indeed a descendent of Edward III of England via John of Gaunt, and this is what their son King Henry VII would later use to claim to be the Lancastrian heir. However a) they did not marry until 1455 b) Until 1471 several other male Beauforts would have seen themselves as having better claims than York including her cousins the 3rd and 4th Dukes of Somerset (and also the heirs of Catherine of Lancaster had an even better claim than the Beauforts). It was only really after 1471 that Henry Tudor became the obvious alternative to the York line. Dunarc ( talk) 22:48, 11 June 2024 (UTC)