Talk:Thomas Quiney

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Thomas Quiney article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thomas Quiney has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 8, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed

Shakespeare Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shakespeare, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of William Shakespeare on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ShakespeareWikipedia:WikiProject ShakespeareTemplate:WikiProject ShakespeareShakespeare articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Warwickshire Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Warwickshire, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Warwickshire. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Please also feel free to join in the discussions on the project's talk page.WarwickshireWikipedia:WikiProject WarwickshireTemplate:WikiProject WarwickshireWikiProject Warwickshire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA?

How close is this article to GA? I can see the lead needs help, as well as a few thing brought up on Judith's page. If that's all there is, we should bring it together and nominate it for GA status... Wrad 03:14, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The prose, in places, is staccato, flows badly, and echoes the sources awkwardly. It also reflects the fact that the article was written in paralell with the Judith Quiney article, which makes the focus a little strange in some places. And a quick scan just now revealed that there are still bits that are not properly cited. I think coverage-wise the article is in fairly good shape; there isn't much more known about Thomas that's worth including here. So, in summary, it still needs some work, I think.--Xover 11:44, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Saint-Gelais

“he decorated them with a couplet in French from a romance by Mellin de Saint-Gelais.”

Neither of the cited sources, however (Honan and Schoenbaum), refer to Mellin de Saint-Gelais specifically: they merely refer to “Saint-Gelais” and may therefore be referring to his uncle, Octavien. At any rate, through some original research, it appears that the source is currently unascertained: the earliest source says it's from Saint-Gelais the romance, as though it were a work rather than an author, and of the subsequent sources one (French) work from c.1930 says it was by Octavien, and another (English) work of the 1990s says it's by Mellin.

As to how this should be reflected in the article, I don't know, which is why I'm recording this concern here. It could simply be changed to say “Saint-Gelais”, but then that leaves people guessing and doesn't convey the full complexity of the matter. To remove it altogether would be bad too: Wikipedia oughtn't gloss over the difficulties of history, but present them as clearly as possible. What is the clearest possible exposition in this circumstance? Does anybody have any opinions?

--Sbp (talk) 20:32, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Children

Shouldn’t it say he had 4 children? How does someone approach documenting children who pass during birth? Is it a person-by-person case? Cool879 (talk) 01:16, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]