Talk:James Croft

Untitled

So, I'm new around here, what's the correct policy when the Encyclopedia Brittanica 11th Ed, seems not to be NPOV? Specifically, the sentences "Croft was all his life a double-dealer." and "he was suspected, probably with good reason, of treasonable correspondence" seem to be biased. --Michael (no relation) Croft MichaelCroft 02:51, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I do think the Brittanica text has some charm. I've added an accurate quote from his Irish diplomacy, which is suggestive. The Brittanica author was thinking of this, and the later cloud over Croft in 1560. Though in suspicion in his life-time he may have done very good work.Unoquha (talk) 14:03, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

NPOV refers to taking a balanced rather than a partisan position on the subject. If there is good WP:RS evidence that man was a rogue, WP should not hesistate to say so, except in a BLP, where it might be libellous, in the absnece of a criminal conviction. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC)