# Talk:Thomas de Rossy

It is clear that a lot of work has gone into this article, but the English expression is not good.  The Pre-episcopal career section needs to be totally re-written for clarity and the following long, complicated, sentences need to be revised to allow for easier readability:

By 1375 Thomas, now vicar general of the Franciscan Order in Scotland, was running out of money, making the completion of his studies in Paris uncertain; in this year and for that reason, Pope Gregory XI wrote to Walter de Wardlaw, Bishop of Glasgow, authorising Walter (a renowned scholar himself) and other doctors to grant Thomas, if they found him "fit", a Licentiate and a Doctorate in Theology so that Thomas could legally teach.[8]
Although no "crusade" ever took place, around 1384 Thomas issued an invitation to Henry Dispenser, Bishop of Norwich, with an open invitation to any other English bishop, to debate with come to a debate with him, or, if they preferred, to fight him in single combat.[21]
One charter of his survives, dated July 16, 1381, through which he confirmed a grant of the church of Buittle to Sweetheart Abbey; the charter was issued at Kirkchrist in Twynholm parish, and was confirmed by the (Avignon) Pope on October 18 when Rossy himself was present at the papal court.[24]
His Quaestio de Conceptione Virginis Immaculatae, following the ideas of Duns Scotus, is a reiteration of the arguments for the Immaculate Conception and refutation of many of the scholars opposed to it and their arguments, including those of Bernard of Clairvaux, Giles of Rome, Bonaventure O. F. M., Richard Middleton, Facinus de Ast, Robert Cowton O. F. M., Alexander of Hales and Gregory of Rimini.[30]
Rossy's second work, the Tractatus Episcopi Candidae Casae de Regno Scotiae in Facto Schismatis contra Anglicos suos Vicinos is a defense of Clement VII and an attack on the legitimacy of "Bartolomeo of Bari" (i.e. Urban VI); it contains a long, detailed account of the events leading up to the Schism partially derived from Cardinal Peter Flandrin, and in forwarding the justification for Clement, makes extensive use of prophecy, especially prophecies attributed to Saint John of Bridlington.[32]
I'm putting this article on hold as the article is close to meeting the GA criteria. However, the issues noted above must be dealt with before GA status can be awarded. I hope that this can be addressed within the seven days allowed by on hold, and wish you all the best with your editing... -- Johnfos (talk) 07:03, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Done. You don't have to let me off that easy, you know. Are there no more problems? Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 08:00, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Pass. Good work. Johnfos (talk) 21:59, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

If Thomas was last mentioned in the sources in 1397, why do the infobox and the succession box give the range (1393 x 1406) for his death? (@Deacon of Pndapetzim:) – Swa cwæð Ælfgar (talk) 22:26, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
I've checked the ODNB for this one and 1393 was clearly a error that I've corrected. – Swa cwæð Ælfgar (talk) 09:51, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
There is a contradiction in the page ranges for the two books by Watt. In the notes, there is Biographical Dictionary pp. 471-3, but in the references, it's 521–2 for the Biographical Dictionary, and the range 471-3 is attributed to Fasti Ecclesiae…. – Swa cwæð Ælfgar (talk) 22:35, 12 October 2018 (UTC)