Jump to content

Talk:Robert Wishart: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Update: class=C.
Update: WP Cath assessment criteria
Line 4: Line 4:
|listas=Wishart, Robert
|listas=Wishart, Robert
}}
}}
{{WikiProject Christianity|class=C|importance=Low |catholicism=yes|catholicism-importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Christianity|class=C|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Catholicism|class=C|importance=Low
| b1 <!--Referencing & citations--> = <yes/no>
| b2 <!--Coverage & accuracy --> = <yes/no>
| b3 <!--Structure --> = <yes/no>
| b4 <!--Grammar & style --> = <yes/no>
| b5 <!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no>
| b6 <!--Accessibility --> = <yes/no>}}
{{WikiProject Medieval Scotland|class=C|importance=medium}}
{{WikiProject Medieval Scotland|class=C|importance=medium}}
}}
}}

Revision as of 21:22, 20 February 2019

Guardians and Queens

I really do not want to make too much of this, and I have seen from the relevant talk page just how much intellectual energy has been devoted to Margaret's exact title and status; but I think it is a reasonably safe assumption that Wishart-and others- would have continued to act as Guardian even afer her inauguration as queen, considering her age. The amendment on this point is therefore misleading. I would have edited accordingly; but having no wish to cause upset or offence will allow this to stand for a day or two for comment. Thereafter it will stand as justification. Rcpaterson 23:19, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you're right (unless, speculating, Bek had been appointed Regent by her father-in-law-to-be). Still, Wishart would surely have been on the regency council. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have now made what I think is a neutral, and open-ended, amendment. Rcpaterson 21:59, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]