Talk:Knights Templar in Scotland

message: Hi Hetar
This article is medieval only. This material is different from the article you re-directed to which is post suppresion.
--SKT1314 15:30, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: We seem to have two articles here, which should probably be merged into one:
* Scottish Knights Templar
* Knights Templar in Scotland
I recommend that we merge both into the latter name, so as to be consistent with another article, Knights Templar in England.  Does anyone else have any thoughts on this? --Elonka 23:54, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good suggestion, supported. Steve Zissou 17:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On no account.  This is about the mediaeval order, and the other article is about the modern order.  Any connection between the two is speculative. --Quaerere Verum 15:29, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: Moved from User Page: Dikkat (It was not in the correct place) --Dikkat 09:31, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you (Chris Brown?) User Talk:Docbro support your edits with reliable sources you would then improve the article instead of looking like sock puppetry with so many IP addresses for single issue edits to this and associated articles. As an open source encyclopedia, we have to rely on verifiable material rather than information from editors. .--Dikkat 09:31, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Interesting to note that these edits are now signed "Docbro", "Dr Chris Brown", when it was previously signed "CsinC". , ,and. What has changed, I wonder? 217.44.85.35 10:49, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Many of the references are from pulished books? None are given by you  --Alithea 13:37, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

text: In your opinion. Wikipedia is not about individual opinions, it is collaborative verifiable,WP:NPOVwork by groups of editors. You cannot edit without providing support for your edits. --Alithea 14:14, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

text: The article linked to other Wikipedia articles reads Bishop Lamberton of St Andrews, Guardian of Scotland 1299-1301 not 1312, supported by references. --Alithea 15:31, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to record, because the revision history of this page is temporarily not working, the original and correct title of this section, and what it discusses is "Dr Chris Brown" and his unreferenced edits to the article. Someone, presumably the user who signs "Docbro" keeps changing the title to reflect his/her interpretation of those edits, probably with the intention of changing the meaning of the section. Without citations they are of no value to Wikipedia. --213.158.197.203 15:37, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

text: It is possibly relevant that in John of Fordun's Chronicle of the Scottish Nation edited by W F Skene , a major source of Scottish mediaeval history, there is no mention of the Templars.  Dr Chris Brown is a Scottish Mediaeval Historian, author amongs others of William Wallace: The True Story of Braveheart ISBN 0752434322. Despite the lack of references to support edits to date, we should respect and welcome his contribution.  --Quaerere Verum 05:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unreferenced edits

message: This page is to discuss the article, and not the subject matter. It is not a discussion forum. Please consider this before adding further comments. --Quaerere Verum 05:33, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talk-page, not a discussion forum 

message: This article was nominated for deletion on 25 January 2008, and the result was WP:Speedy Keep. Here, for the record, is the archived discussion. --Sannhet (talk) 22:28, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well now, you've gone right past point 1, "No-one other than the nominator recommends that the page be deleted"? The debate is closed for that reason, and reverting the WP:AfD tag only leads to the closed debate. This article is part of the Knights Templar series, if you really think these articles are not needed, why don't you take up your cause there, instead of singling out this article for no purpose obvious other than disruption after the deletion of your article Pseudo-orders, archived discussion? --Frank Ness (talk) 17:19, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yopie, it is not possible to keep the WP:Afd open. It is closed, in accordance with  Wikedia's articles for deletion process. The result was Speedy keep, possibly pointy nomination. Now, perhaps you can give a credible explanation here why you put an established, referenced and cited article for deletion. If as you put it "No one need article about extinct order in one country. With this direction there can be "Knights Templar in Ireland", or "Order of St. Stanislaus in Sweden"", then can you explain why have many editors contributed to a Knights Templar Series? Will you try to have the series deleted, because somehow you saw the deletion of your article Pseudo-orders as a plot by the dead hand of an extinct Order?  --Quaerere Verum (talk) 20:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possibly pointy nomination for deletion