Several recent postings in this thread say that Queen Elizabeth I's
maternal
grandparents were Sir William Boleyn and Margaret Butler. This is of
course
erroneous. The Queen's maternal grandparents were Thomas Boleyn, Earl
of Ormonde and Wiltshire, and Elizabeth Howard. Earl Thomas was the son
of Sir William and Margaret (Butler) Boleyn.
C.P. Correction: Birthdate of Margaret Butler, wife of Willi
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
Douglas Richardson
Re: C.P. Correction: Birthdate of Margaret Butler, wife of W
Margaret (Butler) Boleyn was Queen Anne Boleyn's grandmother.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
-
Gjest
Re: C.P. Correction: Birthdate of Margaret Butler, wife of W
Tim Powys-Lybbe schrieb:
Too early to tell for Rootsweb, but they've vanished from Google
Groups. Isn't the Hansard cooling-off period only to correct errors in
the record -i.e. it doesn't allow MPs to emend their own errors, only
those of the copyists?
In message of 11 May, mjcar@btinternet.com wrote:
These postings have now been curiously edited away,
Where have they been edited away from?
Rootsweb's archives?
Too early to tell for Rootsweb, but they've vanished from Google
Groups. Isn't the Hansard cooling-off period only to correct errors in
the record -i.e. it doesn't allow MPs to emend their own errors, only
those of the copyists?
-
John Higgins
Re: C.P. Correction: Birthdate of Margaret Butler, wife of W
It's been mentioned before that this dubious practice of deleting postings
because they contain errors which might embarrass the writer applies only to
the Google archives for the group. The full record is preserved in the
Rootsweb archive. (One big advantage of the gateway between Gen-Med and
SGM...)
This has reached a new low in this thread, where no less than 6 posts have
been deleted by a single author, and now in a sudden burst of activity
they're being replaced with "corrected" versions - sadly out-of-place in the
chronology of the thread. Why not save all this wasted bandwidth and simply
note that a mistake was made and just point out the mistake?
----- Original Message -----
From: <mjcar@btinternet.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 1:41 PM
Subject: Re: C.P. Correction: Birthdate of Margaret Butler, wife of William
Boleyn, K.B.
because they contain errors which might embarrass the writer applies only to
the Google archives for the group. The full record is preserved in the
Rootsweb archive. (One big advantage of the gateway between Gen-Med and
SGM...)
This has reached a new low in this thread, where no less than 6 posts have
been deleted by a single author, and now in a sudden burst of activity
they're being replaced with "corrected" versions - sadly out-of-place in the
chronology of the thread. Why not save all this wasted bandwidth and simply
note that a mistake was made and just point out the mistake?
----- Original Message -----
From: <mjcar@btinternet.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 1:41 PM
Subject: Re: C.P. Correction: Birthdate of Margaret Butler, wife of William
Boleyn, K.B.
"Clagett, Brice" schrieb:
Several recent postings in this thread say that Queen Elizabeth I's
maternal
grandparents were Sir William Boleyn and Margaret Butler. This is of
course
erroneous. The Queen's maternal grandparents were Thomas Boleyn, Earl
of Ormonde and Wiltshire, and Elizabeth Howard. Earl Thomas was the son
of Sir William and Margaret (Butler) Boleyn.
These postings have now been curiously edited away, which would make
Brice's comment itself seem erroneous, if it weren't for the extracted
quotes from the original posts in some of the replies. I always feel
uncomfortable seeing posts edited or removed in this way (while
sympathising with the desire to maintain accuracy) because it tampers
with the historical record that the newsgroup's archives constitute.
-
Chris Phillips
Re: C.P. Correction: Birthdate of Margaret Butler, wife of W
John Higgins wrote:
I must say that even when the replacements used to be marked "Revised post"
I thought it was rather inconsiderate to expect people to read through
everything twice and try to spot the difference.
Now it's even more confusing, with near-duplicate posts in some archives,
and nothing except the timestamp to indicate which are right and which are
wrong. Indeed, unless future readers spot these duplications and work out
what's going on, they may not realise errors are present at all.
Surely it's clearer, and less trouble for all concerned, to post a short
correction message and have done with it.
Chris Phillips
This has reached a new low in this thread, where no less than 6 posts have
been deleted by a single author, and now in a sudden burst of activity
they're being replaced with "corrected" versions - sadly out-of-place in
the
chronology of the thread. Why not save all this wasted bandwidth and
simply
note that a mistake was made and just point out the mistake?
I must say that even when the replacements used to be marked "Revised post"
I thought it was rather inconsiderate to expect people to read through
everything twice and try to spot the difference.
Now it's even more confusing, with near-duplicate posts in some archives,
and nothing except the timestamp to indicate which are right and which are
wrong. Indeed, unless future readers spot these duplications and work out
what's going on, they may not realise errors are present at all.
Surely it's clearer, and less trouble for all concerned, to post a short
correction message and have done with it.
Chris Phillips