This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject English Royalty. For more information, visit the project page.English RoyaltyWikipedia:WikiProject English RoyaltyTemplate:WikiProject English RoyaltyEnglish royalty articles
This article is an absolute horror. No primary sources are cited for anything. Legends, half-truths, and bald claims are profusely throughout, unquoted, and uncited. It's a maze of epic proportions and should be completely stricken and begun from scratch.Wjhonson (talk) 15:28, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The article as at 2013, and today. The main section that has appeared is a 'Rosamund in Fiction' section, a reference to Weir and some other academic texts have also appeared but many with no page numbers that make it an awful lot less useful. — aoyma3 (talk) 08:38, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
