I rather suspect that depends upon who's version of the truth.
Some seem to claim that Richardson is the sole custodian of the truth, that unless he says so, it is false. Were this the case, there would be no need for research, we could just copy everything blindly.
With most historical "facts", there is more than one interpretation, depending upon who you choose to believe. There are far more 'grey' areas than those that are black or white, so I think we have to be prepared to acknowledge all opinions , rather than accede to just one.