Revision as of 05:40, 7 October 2019 editKfein (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,534 edits →Sources that help establish notability and should be incorporated for neutrality← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:21, 7 October 2019 edit undoKfein (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,534 edits →Proposal for deletion of sentenceNext edit → | ||
Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
] (]) 05:40, 7 October 2019 (UTC) | ] (]) 05:40, 7 October 2019 (UTC) | ||
I deleted the two references. It should be added back only if an independent source can be found that refers to primary documentary evidence supporting this assertion. | |||
] (]) 07:21, 7 October 2019 (UTC) |
Revision as of 07:21, 7 October 2019
Shakespeare Start‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
This article was nominated for deletion on 28 March 2016. The result of the discussion was keep. |
Sources that help establish notability and should be incorporated for neutrality
- Hope, Warren; Holston, Kim (2009). The Shakespeare Controversy: An Analysis of the Authorship Theories (2nd. ed.). McFarland. pp. 128-129.
{{cite book}}
: Invalid|ref=harv
(help)
- Edmondson, Paul; Wells, Stanley (2013). Shakespeare Beyond Doubt: Evidence, Argument, Controversy. Cambridge UP. pp. 54-60.
{{cite book}}
: Invalid|ref=harv
(help)
- Carnegie, David; Taylor, Gary (2012). The Quest for Cardenio: Shakespeare, Fletcher, Cervantes, and the Lost Play. Oxford UP. pp. 67-69.
{{cite book}}
: Invalid|ref=harv
(help)
Two of these I found accidentally while trying to find anything else by the publisher of The Truth Will Out, so I'm curious as to why they haven't appeared yet. @RalphWinwood: how did you not find these? Or if you did, why did you not incorporate them? Ian.thomson (talk) 03:05, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Proposal for deletion of sentence
Though this is properly sourced, it is false; there is no actual documentary evidence to support this assertion: As a boy, Neville was educated within the household of Sir William Cecil, Lord Burghley.
I propose deleting it unless someone knows of an independent documentary source that suggests that this is correct. Perhaps someone can give me guidance in how to properly resolve an issue such as this.
Kfein (talk) 05:40, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
I deleted the two references. It should be added back only if an independent source can be found that refers to primary documentary evidence supporting this assertion. Kfein (talk) 07:21, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
Categories: