[WikiEN-l] WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 69, Issue 104

[Dahsun]

Re :King Arthur is the ancestor of the present Queen Elizabeth

If he existed, and I understand prevailing wisdom is that there probably was at least one dark age warlord behind the myth, and if he had progeny then its statistically probable that he features in the ancestry of our current Queen and everyone else who has any British ancestry.

WereSpielChequers

"When Adam delved and Eve span,
who was then the gentleman?"


> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 8
> Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 00:38:26 +0100
> From: doc <doc.wikipedia at ntlworld.com>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Notability in Wikipedia
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <49F641F2.3030103 at ntlworld.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
> 
> Thomas Dalton wrote:
> > 2009/4/27  <WJhonson at aol.com>:
> >> In a message dated 4/27/2009 3:40:00 PM Pacific
> Daylight Time,
> >> doc.wikipedia at ntlworld.com writes:
> >>
> >> If we  can agree something is the sensible thing
> to do, then we do it.
> >> That's  what IAR is all about, and why
> "multiple third-party sources" may
> >> be a  good rule of thumb, but, like most rules,
> must never become Holy
> >> Writ.  (See WP:IAR).>>
> >>
> >>
> >> -------------------------
> >>
> >> So we let creep in such chestnuts as "King
> Arthur is the ancestor of the
> >> present Queen Elizabeth" because this is
> repeated on 12 websites of "local
> >> genealogy" societies.
> > 
> > That's completely unrelated. Using a source to
> establish notability is
> > very different to using that source to establish
> facts. That King
> > Arthur is mentioned on 12 local genealogy society
> websites might well
> > be enough for him to be notable, but some other source
> would need to
> > be used for actually writing the article. There is no
> reason to take
> > reliability of sources into account when determining
> notability, just
> > that the sources exist. This is the point Ken was
> trying to make near
> > the beginning of this thread.
> > 
>