Advice before editing this pre-1700 Hamilton profile?

Question

I have information to contribute to the profile of James Hamilton KG, KT. This is what I can add:

•  The mother of: Charles Hamilton, Comte d'Arran born 30 Mar 1601 d 13 Aug 1754 whose mother was Barbara Fitzroy. Should there not be an option to recognize Barbara Fitzroy's relationship to Li. Gen. James Hamilton, 4th Duke of Hamilton. She didn't marry him so is not a spouse (or defacto) but seems to have had a sexual liaison which resulted in the birth of Charles Hamilton.
• These are the sources I am using:
• "thepeerage.com"

Should I contact one of the pre-1700 projects or know about any style guidelines before proceeding? Thank you!

Answer 1

The Peerage is not an acceptable source for Pre-1700 profiles. Here is the England Project's sourcing guidelines.

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:England_Project_Reliable_Sources

Comments

The question here is not so much about using “the peerage.com” as a source reference but being able to acknowledge the offspring of an affair and in particular acknowledge the mother.

Especially when the mother did not go on and become a spouse, or de facto.

The WikiTree does not seem to be able to make such a indication directly.

WikiTree seems to be trying to set itself above the standards of all other trees out there but this inability to make this distinction, to me, seems like a glaring omission.

Answer 2

The Scotland Project list of reliable sources is at https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Scotland_Project_Reliable_Sources

"thepeerage.com" is regarded as an unreliable source as is Burke's Landed Gentry to which that site frequently refers.

Comments

I’ve responded to John Vaskie and my response to this answer is the same.

There appears to be no way to fully acknowledge the resulting offspring of sexual liaison ( historical) in family trees.

In today’s world of donor sperm, there are hundreds of offspring unable to establish their rights to find out their true family lineage.

The hiding of the truth in historical cases will mean that any family tree will never be a fully legitimate representation.

So getting stuck in academic arguments  these other “sources “ is in danger of becoming pointless.

I’m not asking about using “the peerage.com” here to justify the facts.