Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard of Flanders
This article states things as facts.  I assume that the existence of a Richard Le Forester (or such like) and of his sons can be established.  If so, it ought to be possible to say what lands in England they were granted.  What is not established is that he was a son of Baldwin V, or that he is the ancester of every one called Foster or Forster.  There were a lot of Royal Forests in England, and many of them had foresters, for some of whom this will have become a surname.  Either this article should be deleted, but it would be better if it were toned down in the light of this AFD discussion.  That Pearce claimed he was a son of Baldwin V is factual; however from what others have discovered this factoid is not based on any reliable source.  Accordingly, Pearce (and probably many websites based on him) are not .  I regret to say that genealogists when dealing with remote periods are inclined to make guesses, which others then quote as fact
— User:Peterkingiron, 15:05, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:RS (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)