Talk:Sir Thomas Penyston, 1st Baronet

A fact from Sir Thomas Penyston, 1st Baronet appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 23 March 2009 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that 17th-century baronet Sir Thomas Peniston received £50 per year as a member of the retinue of Richard Sackville, 3rd Earl of Dorset, and that his wife, Martha, was the Earl's mistress?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2009/March.

Wikipedia

Biography: Peerage and Baronetage

	Biography portal 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 supported by WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage.

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Peniston or Penistone?[edit]

The title and the prose do not agree on this issue for some reason. bibliomaniac 1 5 21:36, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There was no standard spelling at the time and the sources differ. I prepared the article off-line. When I came to move it into the main space, I started from a red link in another article that used a different spelling. Rjm at sleepers (talk) 16:31, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]