Executed for treason?

In looking over Wikipedia's entry on Richard III, I
noticed this interesting tidbit:

"Richard, however, had the king's guardian, Anthony
Woodville, 2nd Earl Rivers (brother of Elizabeth
Woodville, Edward's Queen Consort) and other advisors
arrested and taken to Pontefract Castle, where they
were later executed, allegedly for planning to
assassinate Edward V. He then took Edward and his
younger brother to the Tower of London.

***Over the course of the following months, a number
of regular visitors to Edward in the Tower were
arrested for alleged treason and executed.***"


I'm aware that Wikipedia is at best a questionable
source of information, but I am interested if anyone
here has heard of these supposed executions before,
or if somebody just pulled that "fact" out of thin air.


Take care,
Kat

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com

I can only imagine this is an exaggerated reference to Hastings.
I hope you corrected Wilkipedia.
Paul

On 19 Oct 2007, at 00:25, Rogue wrote:

> In looking over Wikipedia's entry on Richard III, I
> noticed this interesting tidbit:
>
> "Richard, however, had the king's guardian, Anthony
> Woodville, 2nd Earl Rivers (brother of Elizabeth
> Woodville, Edward's Queen Consort) and other advisors
> arrested and taken to Pontefract Castle, where they
> were later executed, allegedly for planning to
> assassinate Edward V. He then took Edward and his
> younger brother to the Tower of London.
>
> ***Over the course of the following months, a number
> of regular visitors to Edward in the Tower were
> arrested for alleged treason and executed.***"
>
>
> I'm aware that Wikipedia is at best a questionable
> source of information, but I am interested if anyone
> here has heard of these supposed executions before,
> or if somebody just pulled that "fact" out of thin air.
>
>
> Take care,
> Kat
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

"Richard Liveth Yet!"

--- In , "Rogue" <roguefem@...>
wrote:
>
> In looking over Wikipedia's entry on Richard III, I
> noticed this interesting tidbit:
>
> "Richard, however, had the king's guardian, Anthony
> Woodville, 2nd Earl Rivers (brother of Elizabeth
> Woodville, Edward's Queen Consort) and other advisors
> arrested and taken to Pontefract Castle, where they
> were later executed, allegedly for planning to
> assassinate Edward V. He then took Edward and his
> younger brother to the Tower of London.
>
> ***Over the course of the following months, a number
> of regular visitors to Edward in the Tower were
> arrested for alleged treason and executed.***"
>
>
> I'm aware that Wikipedia is at best a questionable
> source of information, but I am interested if anyone
> here has heard of these supposed executions before,
> or if somebody just pulled that "fact" out of thin air.
>
>
> Take care,
> Kat
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com
>
This is Wikipedia at it's worst. It is a user-defined encyclopedia so
that those pathetic flat-earthers who still think of Shakespeare's
works as a history textbook have regularly altered Richard's entry,
and others. They even changed the Weasel's entry to praise him for
not executing the Countess of Salisbury.
Now if you want to know more about an uncontroversial person, try
Wikipedia for that.

Dear Stephen ý



I have found Wikipedia a wonderful resource for all sorts of things I have
wanted information about, including not least, their listings of useful
links that usually appear at the bottom of entries.



I note that there are procedures set up by Wikipedia to challenge entries,
provide sources, and debate changes that should be made. I have noted this
frequently on entries which are considered somewhat controversial. If this
hasnýt been done for these Ricardian entries, perhaps you and others who are
knowledgeable might consider doing so.



I use Wikipedia so often that I would be willing to pay for the privilege,
which is saying something.



Best,



Johanne



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Johanne L. Tournier

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Email ý HYPERLINK
"mailto:jltournier@..."jltournier@...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



_____

From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of Stephen Lark
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 6:53 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Executed for treason?



[JLT] <snip Katýs msg for brevity>


This is Wikipedia at it's worst. It is a user-defined encyclopedia so
that those pathetic flat-earthers who still think of Shakespeare'-s
works as a history textbook have regularly altered Richard's entry,
and others. They even changed the Weasel's entry to praise him for
not executing the Countess of Salisbury.
Now if you want to know more about an uncontroversial person, try
Wikipedia for that.




No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.15.0/1077 - Release Date: 10/18/2007
9:54 AM



No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.15.0/1077 - Release Date: 10/18/2007
9:54 AM

If you read some of the comments on the page history
for Richard III, you'll see that there are some folks
who are striving mightily to clean up after the worst
excesses from either side.

--- Stephen Lark <stephenmlark@...> wrote:

> --- In ,
> "Rogue" <roguefem@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > In looking over Wikipedia's entry on Richard III,
> I
> > noticed this interesting tidbit:
> >
> > "Richard, however, had the king's guardian,
> Anthony
> > Woodville, 2nd Earl Rivers (brother of Elizabeth
> > Woodville, Edward's Queen Consort) and other
> advisors
> > arrested and taken to Pontefract Castle, where
> they
> > were later executed, allegedly for planning to
> > assassinate Edward V. He then took Edward and his
> > younger brother to the Tower of London.
> >
> > ***Over the course of the following months, a
> number
> > of regular visitors to Edward in the Tower were
> > arrested for alleged treason and executed.***"
> >
> >
> > I'm aware that Wikipedia is at best a questionable
> > source of information, but I am interested if
> anyone
> > here has heard of these supposed executions
> before,
> > or if somebody just pulled that "fact" out of thin
> air.
> >
> >
> > Take care,
> > Kat
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com
> >
> This is Wikipedia at it's worst. It is a
> user-defined encyclopedia so
> that those pathetic flat-earthers who still think of
> Shakespeare's
> works as a history textbook have regularly altered
> Richard's entry,
> and others. They even changed the Weasel's entry to
> praise him for
> not executing the Countess of Salisbury.
> Now if you want to know more about an
> uncontroversial person, try
> Wikipedia for that.
>
>

--- In , "Johanne Tournier"
<jltournier@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Stephen –
>
>
>
> I have found Wikipedia a wonderful resource for all sorts of things
I have
> wanted information about, including not least, their listings of
useful
> links that usually appear at the bottom of entries.
>
>
>
> I note that there are procedures set up by Wikipedia to challenge
entries,
> provide sources, and debate changes that should be made. I have
noted this
> frequently on entries which are considered somewhat controversial.
If this
> hasn't been done for these Ricardian entries, perhaps you and
others who are
> knowledgeable might consider doing so.
>
>
>
> I use Wikipedia so often that I would be willing to pay for the
privilege,
> which is saying something.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Johanne
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Johanne L. Tournier
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Email – HYPERLINK
> "mailto:jltournier@..."jltournier@...
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

That is the problem. If we correct entries then the flat-earthers can
re-insert their errors and I understand that changes can only be made
so often. We would need to make a concerted effort on a particular
day - the fact that the historical facts favour us does not solve the
problem.

Those who are also on Sceptred Isle should think about the person
known as "Little Miss Anagram" who, in July, continually posted
irrational, unhistorical rubbish about the pre-contract. It didn't
matter that she doesn't read history books, cannot think with a
medieval mindset and takes no notice of evidence - her view was just
as "valid" as everyone else - until a few of us took care of her!

I would tackle Wikipedia if I had time, indeed I used it this morning
to check something about Montesquieu and d'Estrades, but here comes
another important point: the internet is not a primary source but a
tool to access primary sources and once we realise that we can make
better use of it.

For instance, all Henry IV's legitimate descendants except his
crowned grandson were dead by the end of 1447 yet Castelli assigns
two of Humphrey of Gloucester's illegitimate children to his wife
instead of his mistress and makes a similar error with Lady Margaret
Beaufort's sister(IIRC) Thomasine. The first error would make
Humphrey's daughter's descendants (Lords Grey of Powis) the real
Lancastrian claimants before Henry IV's full sisters' lines that
became the Portugese Royal family until 1910.

Tompsett confuses Lord Richard de la Pole, who fled to France and was
killed in Italy in 1524/5, with Sir Richard Pole who died twenty
years earlier. He also has Lord Capell captured in Colchester in
summer 1649, four months AFTER he was executed - another energetic
corpse.

To conclude: by all means use the internet, as I do, but just be
careful.
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From:
> [mailto:] On Behalf Of
Stephen Lark
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 6:53 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: Executed for treason?
>
>
>
> [JLT] <snip Kat's msg for brevity>
>
>
> This is Wikipedia at it's worst. It is a user-defined encyclopedia
so
> that those pathetic flat-earthers who still think of Shakespeare'-s
> works as a history textbook have regularly altered Richard's entry,
> and others. They even changed the Weasel's entry to praise him for
> not executing the Countess of Salisbury.
> Now if you want to know more about an uncontroversial person, try
> Wikipedia for that.
>
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.15.0/1077 - Release Date:
10/18/2007
> 9:54 AM
>
>
>
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.15.0/1077 - Release Date:
10/18/2007
> 9:54 AM
>
>
>
>
>