Talk:Henry the Young King
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Didn't think this was possible. My first thought was merely to criticise the entry. Instead I shall read more on this period and try to flesh out the sparse facts you present. Thanks C
- Such is the power of Wikipedia. Welcome! --mav
I am sceptical about the starting of divorce proceedings, because this would have lost control of the Vexin for the Plantagenets. Is there any evidence Henry and Margaret parted because of divorce? Or is it more likely, as E.Hallam [The Plantagenet Chronicles] and A.Kelly [Eleanore and the Four Kings] state, that civil war made it too dangerous for her to remain accessible as a hostage? G.Duby [Guillaume le Mareshal] states that Wiiliam was exonerated from any taint of adultery and returned to Young Henry's side on campaign shortly before Henry died. Additionally none of the contemporary chroniclers gave the adultery story any credance. Trev.
Double check facts in this article with facts from the article on Marguerite... info on her pregnancies and marriages don't match up. It says she was married @ 2 years old but was more than likely only betrothed at that age.
[edit] Divisions
Dear Mr Sanders though you may think that the divisions were unnecessary your meddling while I was writing up one of the new sections casued me to lose a lot of text and waste half an hour of my time. Perhap you can wait till I have done it this time and then address your concerns David Skipper 12:38, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sorry for that; however, there is generally the option of merging edit conflicted text into the saved version, and it is almost always copyable from the screen. Alternately, you can signal that you are in the middle of writing a large scale revision by sticking up a work in progress template (I don't know how to do that, but I'm sure someone else could tell you), or posting to that effect on the talk page. Personally, I always write up large scale edits on word - it keeps it safe. I'm sorry if I caused you any problems - however, it might be best if you indicate that you are not done next time (you gave no indication that you were doing anything other than introducing divisions into what was a short article). Michaelsanders 12:43, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough, and the idea of working off screen is a good one. Work in progress sign - I must find out how to do that.David Skipper 13:02, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Oh ... and I intend to be revising this article pretty thoroughly over the next few days David Skipper 13:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
- Right then - I'll make sure I don't interfere with it (though I now know that the divisions are intended to be better filled, I might have tidied up a few words or something - so it's good you said it). Michaelsanders 13:10, 13 January 2007 (UTC)