Talk:William Stubbs

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Science and Academia 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 science and academia work group (assessed as High-importance). Christianity: Anglicanism Low‑importance Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Anglicanism (assessed as Mid-importance). University of Oxford Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford 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.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms Low‑importance Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Middle Ages Low‑importance Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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]

Parts of the article are clean over the top and highly unencyclopedic, for example: "Bishop Stubbs belongs to the front rank of historical scholars both as an author and a critic. He stands out as a master of every department of the historian's work, from the discovery of materials to the elaboration of well founded theories and literary production". Wow. Norvo (talk) 23:47, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps more a case of citations needed. I am fairly certain that few scholars of the period would regard the passage quoted as necessarily ott, subject to the reservations in the next paragraphs of the article ("....not entirely unquestionable..."; " ...his ideas of a confrontational political framework have been superseded..." Qexigator (talk) 07:13, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The words quoted ("...belongs to the front rank of historical scholars...") are part of the Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.) article, which was contributed by "W.Hu.", i.e., the historian W.H.Hutton. I have added the citation in the text, which was otherwise covered by the general ref. to En. Brit.Qexigator (talk) 14:50, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it not time to remove the notice dated February 2008: "This article includes a list of references, related reading or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. Please improve this article by introducing more precise citations." ?Qexigator (talk) 10:32, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]