Jump to content

Talk:Stuart Restoration/Archives/ 1

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


Declaration of Breda

An editor has included the unsupported statement that the Declaration of Breda included "conditions" when it manifestly did not; Charles was restored unconditionally (though I suppose with a hope of good intent). This has been discussed on that articles discussion page here. --Utinomen (talk) 01:17, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

As you say this is being discussed on the talk page of the see talk:Declaration of Breda -- PBS (talk) 02:17, 1 July 2010 (UTC)


The statement "[C]onstitutionally, it was as if the last nineteen years had never happened" (Harris, Tim Restoration:Charles II and His Kingdoms 1660-1685 Allen Lane (2005) p47) depends on who's understanding or the unwritten constitution is used. Tying that sentence in with "Charles was restored 'free of limitations'" (Coward, Barry The Stuart Age: England 1603-1714 2nd edition Longman (1997) p286). is I think a synthesis and presents a very limited view of what was a complicated situation. -- PBS (talk) 02:17, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Disagree, it is clearly referenced material. If editors have referenced material on other aspects they can add them. Leaving them out is clearly a synthesis and creates a false impression. Editors must follow WP:NPOV and WP:Source --Utinomen (talk) 21:20, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Just because it is referenced material does not fee the sentences from synthesis and it presents a very limited view of what was a complicated situation. What do you think is the false impression that given not including these sentences? -- PBS (talk) 02:02, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
As noted above the most important aspect constitutionally of Charles II's return was that it was deemed that the republic had never existed. You appear to be denying that fact?--Utinomen (talk) 08:11, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Utinomen, you have made an edit it has been reverted. We are discussing it, why are you reverting reverts instead of seeking consensus on the talk page? -- PBS (talk) 10:12, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Restoration (England). 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 13:52, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Stuart_Restoration/Archives/_1&oldid=1006956229"