To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: | b1 <!-- Referencing and citations --> = <yes/no> | b2 <!-- Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> | b3 <!-- Structure --> = <yes/no> | b4 <!-- Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> | b5 <!-- Supporting materials --> = <yes/no>
Conflicting info in different sources regarding highest rank in French service
We ought to make clear that different reliable sources dispute his rank in French service. For example, the DNB is quite explicit:
"Contrary to some accounts, Rutherford never rose beyond the rank of colonel in French service, and was certainly not promoted to the prestigious rank of lieutenant général."
Per Wikipedia policy, where reliable ext refs conflict it is our duty to neutrally present the conflict and allow the reader to research further if they so wish. --Mais oui! (talk) 02:59, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
I've tried to do just that. EB1911 was responsible for the lieutenant general claim. I also took out the wording "though this was certainly not (as claimed in the Oxford DNB) upon the death of the Earl of Irvine d.1645" as it's hard to know what the claim is (the public domain ODNB doesn't go into this) and it's not clear what the antecedent of "this" is. David Brooks (talk) 14:06, 19 June 2017 (UTC)