Template talk:Rayment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] TfD debate
This template survived a TfD debate, the result was speedy keep. The discussion can be found here. - Bobet 14:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reliability
Unfortunately, some of the information on that website is (apparently) claimed to be unreliable by the author himself! See [1]. I think I have noticed at least one such error: at [2], he calls the First Baron Montacute (1299) "John de Montacute" whereas TCP and [3] (which references TCP and Burke's) calls him "Simon". Ardric47 01:03, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- How accurate do you think anyone could be about some obscure peer who lived approximately 700 years ago? Not to mention that I'm sure Debrett's, Burke's, The Complete Peerage, and whatever other sources people might use would probably contain conflicting information - probability dictates that if you're trying to cover the life of *every single peer* since the 11th century, you'll make a few mistakes and have a lot of inconsistencies. :) – ugen64 02:34, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed with Ugen. Rayment is right about 99% of the time. Mackensen (talk) 02:38, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not saying that Debrett's et al. don't have as many mistakes—it's just that their mistakes are unintentional. Ardric47 06:02, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
- The content of my link "[1]" above is no longer directly available, due to a redirect. It is still available through the history, though, at [4]. It includes a statement by Mr. Rayment that he knew that Wikipedia was using his material because he had included copyright traps. Ardric47 03:34, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not saying that Debrett's et al. don't have as many mistakes—it's just that their mistakes are unintentional. Ardric47 06:02, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
It is noticeable that, at least for the moment, Mr. Rayment's site has disappeared. In terms of accuracy, Mr. Rayment's site is highly reliable, for the most part, when checked against the Complete Peerage and Burke's. He may have included some copyright traps, as he claims, and we should try to replace him as a reference wherever possible with more reputable sources. john k 16:15, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
