Talk:Colin Woodard

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Colin Woodard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:13, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

sourced but dead wrong[edit]

The articles claims that crossbones is based Woodard's book. While it is true that Woodard was afaik working as advisor/consultant the completely fictious plot of crossbones has practically nothing to do with Woodard's (nonfiction) book (other than Blackbeard appearing in both).--Kmhkmh (talk) 06:30, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Puff piece or encyclopedia bio?[edit]

For one thing Woodward isn't a "historian". He's a journalist who writes pop history books that have had about zero impact on academic history. Writing a book about history does not automatically confer one with the title of "historian". Jonathan f1 (talk) 19:10, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Historian" was added just in January (without discussion). I don't see him described that way by sources so I've reverted it to the original wording. Schazjmd (talk) 19:51, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]