Talk:Lauder

Scotland Low‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics 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.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

UK geography Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Talk:Lauder/Archive 1

Archive

This should not have been archived. This article is inaccurate, and other editors should not be obstructed from viewing the problems. I myself have regained energy, and am not averse to bringing the issue up again. Misleading information should not exist in any wiki article. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 18:36, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but a Talk Page of that length should be archived. In any case at the time it was archived you, the principal complainant, announced you were leaving Wikipedia. It is still available for all editors to see, as you well know. You are wrong to continue to claim that good faith edits supported by verifiable sources by other scholars, in accordance with WP:reliable sources are "misleading information" just because you don't like them. You clearly need to look at WK:OWN with regard to Wikipedia articles which touch upon mediaeval Scotland. You are outside the good faith parameters here. Regards David Lauder (talk) 18:59, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think we're gonna keep to the scholarly and factual issues this time, rather than attacks on me. BTW, I don't like them because they are wrong. It isn't the other way around. It would be quite surprising if it were, given I have no connection with Lauder or the family or any interest in the place. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 20:45, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It wouldn't bother me if you lived at Lauder or that was your surname. The content is more than well-sourced and references cited. Denouncing all these scholars as "wrong" is surely beyond the pale POV? David Lauder (talk) 15:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

lauder family

g,day. Im from the Lauder family in New Zealand. One of the stories that has been handed down is that the original name of Lauder was in fact a french name.The bloke resposible apparently came over from France as a mercenary to help out Robert the Bruce or someone in their fight against the English. Can this be true? cheers Dean —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.90.61.18 (talk) 04:29, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lauder Bridge

Does anyone know of the whereabouts of the Lauder bridge, that was the locus for the assassination of James III's favourite Robert Cochrane (architect), by Archibald Douglas, 5th Earl of Angus, and others of the Scots nobility? If it is local then perhaps a mention of this incident should be included in the article, as it had huge political implications back in the day. Brendandh (talk) 18:48, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]