Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

sweetplantveal t1_irehq4p wrote

This wiki is terrible. They go from backing the king and creating himself a title to arrested for treason, turned over to rebels, and beheaded in like three sentences. Wtf happened?

142

rapiertwit t1_irei1ud wrote

Is there a ceremonious way to shove a spear up someone's neck-hole and parade their head around?

43

Djidji5739291 t1_irekfsw wrote

Replying to sweetplantveal (#51,486)

Seems perfectly normal. It would happen today if it was legal or people were organized/united enough. Why do you think all the billionaires keep their identity secret, why do they hide their assets so hard that officially the UK royals aren‘t billionaires? Because they are scared of the consequences of exploitation, corruption and greed.

−16

ColoradoScoop t1_irekkty wrote

I feel like having your head ceremoniously impaled on a pike may be even worse.

1

SCKR t1_ireknf6 wrote

His Descendant, the 21th Baron Saye and Sele, is 102 years old and survived 5 british Monarchs.

8

grimgeekx t1_irelmpi wrote

that's some classic comedy, right there.

3

SilasMarner77 OP t1_iremff6 wrote

Replying to sweetplantveal (#51,486)

Yes I must agree that the wiki could have been more clearly written although it lists among its sources some well-written scholarly works. I first heard about this particular episode in our history from the masterful BBC Radio documentary "This Sceptered Isle."

28

Andurilthoughts t1_ireo5v3 wrote

Haha eww gross could you imagine two guys kissing? Anyway let’s get on with parading around these severed heads.

11

Alternative-Flan2869 t1_ireoblt wrote

Murder by gross means is not enough - gotta throw in that homophobe dis for the icing on this sick cake.

−2

WhapXI t1_ireonyj wrote

Replying to sweetplantveal (#51,486)

As it says in the article, he was arrested because he was a supporter of the disgraced Duke of Suffolk.

During the reign of Henry VI, the Duke of Suffolk was largely in charge for a bit. Under his leadership, the Kingdom of England lost most of its land in northern France. This was a time in history when such failure would be dealt with in a way that we would consider harsh. Suffolk was accused of treason and arrested and then murdered.

Baron Saye was arrested and executed in the same kind of factional purge, being a supporter of Suffolk.

89

Djidji5739291 t1_ireou3j wrote

Replying to ChristyM4ck (#51,660)

I‘m saying it‘s not like politicians didn‘t make false promises back then. Corruption is nothing new either. I can imagine hundreds of reasons why a king would be assassinated shortly after being crowned. And I can imagine dozens of reasons why a king would be charged with treason.

−10

WR810 t1_iret308 wrote

Reminds me of when Homer knocked out those two federal investigators (while looking for the one trillion dollar bill) and he ran back to put one man's hand on the other's butt.

6

HPmoni t1_irfahjm wrote

Teenage boy in crowd: Gay!

6

adamup27 t1_irfg8l1 wrote

Replying to sweetplantveal (#51,915)

Not the commenter but I’ve given up on editing Wikipedia. I found an obscure book written by the son of American-Yiddish composer Lazar Weiner. It filled in a ton of gaps and was a fascinating read. I spent about an hour making Weiner’s page present a full picture. I cited my source, corroborated it with some other sources. I clicked save.

Three minutes later a power user reversed it since it was “their” page. It sucked.

49

StopBadModerators t1_irfjbeo wrote

I like to imagine that one guy in the crowd was, "Oh so mature. Way to go, folks. The law was carried out but now you've just got to go and do that. Real fuckin' cute, people. You're such heroes. You are just desescrating those heads and oh, oh now they're... you're... you're doing that. You're making them seem like they're kissing. Way to go. Way. To. Go. A bunch of adults here I can see."

4

VertexBV t1_irfkrg3 wrote

Replying to adamup27 (#53,113)

Maybe I'm not using the mobile app right, but the cited reason was lack of references, and I didn't see one added...

I've never really contributed much to Wikipedia but I've seen quite a few edit wars where an anti-skub would go to the skub page and add unsourced stuff to it to make it look bad, then a pro-skub person would come after and undo everything.

22

Finito-1994 t1_irgi4ro wrote

Replying to seemypinky (#51,524)

You’d think so.

But then again french people used to take a basket of food to have a picnic while they watched beheadings and Roman’s used to go see gladiatorial matches like they were marvel movies so who the fuck knows.

2

SensibleAltruist t1_irheo8h wrote

Dan Jones Hollow Crown (aka Game of Thrones without dragons) explores this in a bit of detail ... Sucks to back the wrong horse

2

Ameisen t1_irhtwb0 wrote

Replying to adamup27 (#53,024)

There are no edits to the page you linked to below that match your story.

The largest edit on there was in 2017, added three sentences, three partial paragraphs, and zero sources, which is why it was removed.

There are no other edits even remotely matching your description.

Seems strange to blame a power user removing it because it was 'their' page...

> Reverted edits by 161.130.188.187 (talk): Failure to cite a reliable source (HG) (3.1.22)

And that user had never made any edits to the page otherwise, nor did they claim that it was 'their' page.

In fact, they left the following two messages on your talk page:

> Hello, I'm Jim1138. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Lazar Weiner, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.

--

> I undid your edit to Lazar Weiner as it was unreferenced. Adding references is how we ensure that content is valid. Without references, a reader can not easily validate information and there is no presumption of accuracy. To add a reference, please read Help:Referencing for beginners and Help:footnotes. This is covered by the Wikipedia policy of wp:verifiability (WP:V). Please wp:cite your edits with wp:reliable sources (RS). Per WP:V unsourced content can be removed. Your edits are saved in the wp:page history. Please add references when you restore the content. Thank you

So, in essence:

#you're a big fat liar.

13

No_Cauliflower_5489 t1_irhuab2 wrote

glossed over by that wiki page is the fact his son-in-law was also his step-son.

2

chocolatecoffeedick t1_irie8ng wrote

that orange idiot and his band of morons need this treatment

3

komanderkyle t1_irj9b8l wrote

“We have fun here at the execution pit”

3

Ameisen t1_iromvnl wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#63,419)

> It's hard to give proper references then. He obviously would have mentioned the book itself.

I mean, yes, that's a completely valid citation. That is what they should have done. Instead they created some story about how it was a power-user 'protecting their article' (which was entirely untrue).

I've seen plenty of people use obscure books for references. I've even checked some of those references and have had to mark the usages as incorrect because they misinterpreted the citation.

The simple thing is that the person who reverted the change may or may not have been a 'power user', but the revert had nothing to do with it 'being their article', they explicitly told them (twice) why they reverted it, and they explicitly requested that they add a citation.

1