User talk:JRawle/Archive 2

Archives
August 2005 – July 2006

Ken Pounds

Hi Jonathan, since someone added Ken Pounds to the Leicester page, I’ve created an article for him; I was wondering whether you could take a look and maybe add some more detail on what work he did regarding black holes, I’m a historian not a physicist so I really have no clue :-) but it seems like he carried out some important work?

I knew you were a PhD physicist from your website, I originally found your nice pictures of Leicester through google image search, sorry i didnt mean to make you feel uncomfortable just thought you may know a bit more then me : )

thanks Tomber

Lord Harries of Pentregarth

Thanks for checking on the online London Gazette. I don't know why many usually reliable sources, including The Times and The Daily Telegraph, announced him wrong! Thanks --Berks105 15:56, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Crazy Monkey Games

Any reason why you undid my vandalism rv? If you look at the "admin site" link -Paradox- added it's to a web site which contains an animated gif of gay sex. Hence my reverting your revert --Blowdart 15:02, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that... I was watching the "recent changes" and saw an IP vandal add obscenities to a URL. As it happened, the original URL itself was also bogus. I didn't see your revision, and the "popup" reversion tool didn't warn me another edit had been made in the meantime – I'll have to look out for that in future! JRawle (Talk) 15:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

John Major - Long Article

Hi, thanks for the comment on my accidental deletion of the end of the John Major article - sorry about that. I am using the Firefox browser (ver 1.5.0.4), where I find the tabbed feature very useful for holding reference information as I write. I have noticed this problem of truncation a few times recently, mainly when I have been previewing an article during composition. I'll have to make sure that I keep an eye on the bottom of the page before saving. --DavidCane 11:28, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Reply

Well policy at the moment is to use "Baroness" for both, and I'd be very much opposed to changing that policy. Wives of knights are different — whereas peeresses can have different titles and surnames, wives of knights are always "Lady Surname", and so "First Names Surname, Lady Surname" is always redundant. Lord Leicester is "Earl of Leicester, of Holkham in the County of Norfolk". This "Earl of Leicester of Holkham" business is just the Complete Peerage getting utterly confused about territorial designations, as usual. Proteus (Talk) 13:16, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

There's no legal impediment to the same title being created dozens of times for different people; it's only convention that keeps titles unique. I suspect Mr Coke just said "Leicester or nothing" and got his own way. It's also possible they looked at the other Earl of Leicester, the 3rd Marquess Townshend, who was at that point 58 and childless, and whose only heir was 51 and also childless, and realised that in all likelihood the title would soon be extinct, and so the period of duplication would be minimal. Proteus (Talk) 13:49, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

He didn't want an earldom at all but was pressured to accept one for reasons relating to his son iirc. Alci12 17:36, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Again, "Lord" is an adjective. The Queen has various Lieutenants in Counties — some are plain Lieutenants (though that rank is now seldom used), some are Deputy Lieutenants, and the most important are Lord Lieutenants. (There's some confusion over whether hyphens are appropriate, but I'd be inclined to say "no", as we don't write "Lord-Chancellor", "Lord-Privy Seal", "Lord-Justice" etc.) The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland might be different — as it was a unique position, I'm not sure whether the holder was a Lord who was the Lieutenant of the King of Ireland or the Lieutenant of Ireland who was rather important (it evolved, of course, when there was a Lord of Ireland rather than a King of Ireland, so it's possible that "Lord Deputy of Ireland" and "Lord Lieutenant of Ireland" were (originally) effectively just "Deputy Lord of Ireland" with reversed word order). At any rate, the modern office is definitely pluralised on the "Lieutenant". Proteus (Talk) 16:55, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Yep, same principle — they're Provosts, not Lords. Proteus (Talk) 17:01, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

With impressive ineptness the Department for Constitutional Affairs manages to give the link to their page as Lords Lieutenant and the page itself as Lord Lieutenants Alci12 09:04, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Runyang Bridge

I wasn't reverting your change to the article, but an anons a few edits back. (S)he had removed the line about China saying that if it was the largest in the world, it obviously was the largest in China. Also it is traditional to call the suspension bridges with the longest span the "largest" bridge and not the "longest". I would not have a problem with changing "largest suspension bridge" to "suspension bridge with longest main-span" but it should not be changed to "longest suspension bridge". -- Samuel Wantman 19:58, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Lord's introduction

Ho, some days ago I've seen a discussion over the territorial designation of the Baron Bragg, so I searched for it and found the minutes. I corrected it to the right form and added the link as source. After this I thought that it could be a good idea to do the same to other articles of life peers to avoid similar cases. I know that many of the hereditary peers had been sitting in the House of Lords, before they were created life peers ; it is often noticed in the articles of them. My phrase of their introduction was refered to the fact that their new titles were announced, not to the fact, that they were new in the House of Lords. Since this was obviously missleading, I will change it (perhaps the reason is that I was thinking in German :-) ) Would be "Announcement of his/her new title at the House of Lords" acceptable? I capitalised the p in life peer, because I had seen the same in many articles, so I thought it was common use. Greetings ... by the way I'm smelting, it's too hot. Phoe 13:37, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

The minutes on web start at 1998 and because I've read it all till Tuesday this week, I had noticed the different processes. However thanks for your explanation. I will use your suggestion and change the links I've added to hereditary peers. Hm yeah German is very easy :-) I hope always my English Grammar isn't too bad Phoe 14:05, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Curzon Street.

Aww, that was a shame. I thought it was 06. I obviously didn't read it properly. At least the area around it is going to be developed. - Erebus555 17:39, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah thats me. Do you have a username on SSC? - Erebus555 11:15, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Um. Well, I'm sure you're not FLD cus you havent editted the Arena Central article. Do you post on the Birmingham forums? - Erebus555 15:52, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Ah I remember now. You dont post much on the Brum forum so thats one reason why I didn't catch your username. I spend most of my SSC time on the Birmingham forum. Well, good to bump into you on here! Keep in touch sometime. - Erebus555 16:10, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Tony Benn

Thanks for adding that source about the Queen's image on stamps! Nice to see someone providing a reference on request! 86.136.0.145 16:24, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for your reminding! ~;-) 百家姓之四 (Lee) 討論 (Discussion) 2006年08月3日12:35 (UTC) 12:35, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Lord Balniel

Sorry! You're right. I have replied on my talk page. --BrownHairedGirl 19:37, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Succession boxes

... also needed for "Commercial ventures" (eg Chairman Arsenal Football Club) etc - Kittybrewster 23:33, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Would {{S-other}}, which I created, be any help here? --BrownHairedGirl 12:16, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I've copied these discussions to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Succession Box Standardization JRawle (Talk) 12:20, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Precedence

We decided a while ago that they weren't really appropriate and should be removed, so just deleting them would seem to be the best idea. Proteus (Talk) 11:11, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Alec Douglas-Home

Hi. Just wondering why you removed the Life title from the list of succession boxes? Yes I know there is no actual succession but the boxes are a usefull way to display all titles and offices for major figures and we've been using them for a while this way. Thanks Galloglass 13:27, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Lord Kitchener

I suspect it's because there's confusion even in official sources as to what the titles are, probably because he was well known as "Kitchener of Khartoum", and so when people (including Gazette editors) see a title "Baron Kitchener, of Khartoum and of Aspall..." they would have a tendency to make the title the same as his nickname. This would make his territorial designation begin with "and", though, which is just impossible (well, it would be a unique occurrence, at any rate). As you can see, even Cracroft's is (in an extremely rare instance) confused about this — it knows that the designation can't begin with "and", but doesn't want to leave out "of Khartoum", so it includes both bits after the comma in the actual title, but "Earl Kitchener of Khartoum and of Broome" is just ridiculous (and, again, would be unique — well, I certainly can't think of any other "X of Y and of Z" titles [and, of course, if they wanted to make one they'd no doubt use "X of Y and Z"]). Proteus (Talk) 11:10, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Category:MPs of the United Kingdom House of Commons, by Parliament

See reply on my talk. --BrownHairedGirl 14:10, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Kitchener

"I looked at the websites to check the date of the Viscountcy, but I found Leigh Rayment says: "Created Baron Kitchener... Viscount Kitchener... Baron Denton, Viscount Brome and Earl Kitchener of Khartoum 27 Jul 1914". And Cracroft's says, "Kitchener of Khartoum and of Broome (3rd), Henry Herbert Kitchener". Both sites suggest the Earldom has a placename in the title, but I don't see why it should have, and I know it doesn't as you've edited the page before. So why are they wrong?"

• Earl Kitchener of Khartoum and of Broome in the County of Kent
• Viscount Broome of Broome in the County of Kent
• Baron Denton of Denton in the County of Kent
• Viscount Kitchener of Khartoum and of the Vaal in the Colony of Transvaal, and of Aspall in the County of Suffolk
• Baron Kitchener of Khartoum and of Aspall in the County of Suffolk

My source lists it like that. The London Gazette copy of the LP for the viscountcy certainly confirms the barony title format "The KING has been pleased to direct Letters Patent to be passed under the Great Seal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland,granting the dignity of a Viscount of the said United Kingdom unto Horatio Herbert, Lord Kitchener of Khartoum". I think we do have an error in our entry. If the latter two are both correct then the similarity to the earldom's patent would be the source of the confusion elsewhere Alci12 16:37, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

The LP for the viscountcy is:

"The KING has been pleased to direct Letters Patent to be passed under the Great Seal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, granting the dignity of a Viscount of the said United Kingdom unto Horatio Herbert, Lord Kitchener of Khartoum, Knight Grand Cross of the Most Honourable Order of the Bath, Knight Grand Cross of the Most Distinguished Order of Saint Michael and Saint George, Member of the Order of Merit, General in the Army, lately Commander-m-Ohief of His Majesty's Forces in South Africa, by the name, style, and title of Viscount Kitchener of Khartoum, and of the Vaal in the Colony of the Transvaal, and of Aspall in the county of Suffolk, with remainder to the heirs male of his body lawfully begotten, and in default of such issue with remainder to the first daughter of the said Horatio Herbert, Lord Kitchener of Khartoum, lawfully begotten, by the name, style, and title of Viscountess Kitchener of Khartoum, and of the Vaal in the Colony of the Transvaal, and of Aspall in the county of Suffolk, and after her decease with remainder to the heirs male of her body, lawfully begotten, by the name, style, and title of Viscount Kitchener of Khartoum, and of the Vaal in the Colony of the Transvaal, and of Aspall in the county of Suffolk, and in default of such issue with remainder to the.second, third, fourth, and every other daughter of the said Horatio Herbert, Lord Kitchener of Khartoum, lawfully begotten, and the heirs male of the body and respective bodies of such daughters severally, and successively one after another as they shall be in seniority of age and priority of birth, and in default of such issue with' remainder to Henry Elliott Chevallier Kitchener, Esquire, Colonel in the Army, brother of the said Horatio Herbert, Lord Kitchener of Khartoum, with remainder to the heirs male of his body,lawfully begotten, and in default of such issue with remainder to Frederick Walter Kitchener, Esquire, Major-General in the Army, another brother of the aforesaid Horatio Herbert,Lord Kitchener of Khartoum, with remainder to the heirs male of his body lawfully begotten." Alci12 16:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Again, that's confusion on the part of the LG (and they merely state that the Letters Patent have been created and summarise their contents, they don't quote them). It'd be no more possible for the Barony and Viscountcy to be "A of B, and of C (and of D)" than it would for the Earldom. (And, of course, it'd be pretty silly for the different ranks to be different titles.) Proteus (Talk) 17:02, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and assuming you're using David Beamish as a source, he's not infallible. He sometimes makes the same mistake elsewhere, e.g. Viscount Allenby (of Megiddo), Baron Stewart (of Stewart's Court), Viscount French (of Ypres). Proteus (Talk) 17:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

As titles have been created without the territorials before and with spelling mistakes or inconsistant with previous titles I certainly don't regard such an error in this case as impossible. Alci12 17:16, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations!

File:Wikiballoon1.png

Happy first edit anniversary, JRawle. :) It's been a pleasure working with you the past year, and indeed, here's to another! Cheers, Sango123 23:06, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

CFD for MPs by Parliament

see CFD for category:MPs of the United Kingdom House of Commons, by Parliament and subcategories. Your comments would be welcome. --BrownHairedGirl 17:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Honours System

Seeing that you've just edited this one how do you feel about removing this entirely

"KBEs are often awarded as honourary knighthoods, but are occasionally awarded to British citizens. Creator of the world wide web Sir Tim Berners-Lee was awarded a KBE presumably because, as an American resident, his title would not be used in everyday life, so he may instead append "KBE" to his name. Actor Sir Alec Guinness received a KBE on recommendation of the Foreign Office, according to his memoirs, for quelling anti-British sentiments at an Argentinian film festival by making a witty speech in Spanish, having learned it by rote following the British"

It's misleading at best - the vast majority of all KBEs are awarded to British/Commonwealth citizens the rare exceptions are honourary awards. The selection of the order of knighthood is simply a matter of the persons distinction and the committee for that specific order selecting that individual according to their criteria. ie a diplomat will be KCMG not KCB and a general the reverse. Tim BL simply fell under the BE Cmtee it has nothing to do with his residential status Alci12 14:27, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

It's a good question and the answer is not exactly obvious at least for the KBE. The original statues for the order were designed to fill those areas not covered by the KG/KT/KP for national distinction and military/governmental KCB, diplomatic KCMG or royal KCVO. The terms were therefore 'military or civil distinction in any field'. Before it existed though there was the knight bachelor that didn't help with women or for higher (now GBE) or lower CBE/OBE/MBE. As each order has a committee that decides on recommendations I suspect it is ultimately arbitrary as to whether you get a kbatchelor or KBE. Certain jobs get an automatic kbatchelor others it appears to depend on which committee gets in first! As to Coe - most of the other leading sports offciails had the same so it was perhaps rather a 'with the rations' award. As to the diplomatic list that's just about where people did what they did. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2615763.stm for a Kbatch on that list Alci12 15:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

"Although the Order of the British Empire has by far the highest number of members of the British Orders of Chivalry, there are fewer appointments to knighthoods than in other orders. Most Knights Commander are honorary members or British subjects living abroad, with only a handful being residents of the United Kingdom." It does though I can't quite decide how. It actually reads closer to the truth than might have been the case as the next line qualifies the above with the remarks about DBEs. SO while it's true that a KBE is far more likely to be hon. than a DBE I still think the use of 'most' is wrong but I'm wondering how one could possibly prove it! Obviously if you look through the ranks of many top soldiers and the like you see the KBE as you do with people like Lord Coe. But there is no central list that I can find to cite Alci12 23:37, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Paternoster

The edit is not a joke, but an explanation of the origin of the name. Your use of the "behave" template is unnecessarily provocative. --StanZegel (talk) 13:19, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Baronets

Please visit WikiProject Baronetcies - Baronetcy project 10:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Baron_Moynihan

I think you've erred slightly here but I don't have all the details on this claim to hand to launch into an edit but will bother proteus and see if he does. Essentially I don't think you can 'terminate' a dormancy. The 4th baron sought and obtained a writ of summons having successfully made out his claim to the Committee for Privileges. The title may be described as 'dormant' but thats not a legal matter; as a matter of law the 4th baron was the 4th baron from the moment of the 3rd barons death, it was only that he settled the claim on 20th March '97. Interestingly of course that means he sat as an MP from '91-92 when he was infact a peer and it was careless by all concerned that he wasn't forced to disclaim any rights to that title or resign his seat - the choice James_Douglas-Hamilton was forced to make under the not that different circumstances in '94. Alci12 16:49, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

You certainly terminate an abeyance, the title is legally held by no one but has co-heirs who the sovereign (the CFP) decide between by calling the title out in favour of one claimant. I'm not sure there is any correct phrase for dormant titles, they are held by whomsoever the LP rules say - seeking a writ is the means by which people tend to prove their right but historically and even today many peers have never sought a writ but were/are unquestionably the holder of the title in law and were recognised officially by the state as such. I suppose it comes down to how you define dormant (i) any title whose holder hasn't made out a claim or the more strict and for mine correct that (i) there is assumed to be an heir if only he could be found and his claim made. I'd call the above peerage unclaimed/unproven or disputed rather than dormant as it was a simply dispute between known claimants for a fairly obvious outcome. Alci12 18:22, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Lord Curzon

Hey Jrawle, thanks for your notice. For me it looks normally better if labels with the same text are grouped, but actually it does not play a large role. In cases with so many different (or/and particularly important) peerages two headers can be usefull, you're right. Greetings Phoe 12:52, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Succession

"Isn't it possible for the succession to a peerage and baronetcy to be different, if they have different remainders, etc?"

Certainly though not usually. Other than peerages by writ and some scottish titles almost everything decends to heirs male of the body lawfully begotten. So provided you don't go back before the creation of one title but after the creation of the other the proof for succession of a peerage and baronetcy would generally be the same. Alci12 16:49, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Respect privacy

Perhaps you might want to consider this proposed policy: Wikipedia:Respect privacy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.129.195.254 (talk • contribs) 22:26, September 10, 2006 (UTC)

I should note, as the author of the above, that the proposal is intended to cover personal information not in the public domain. Whereas Wikipedia:Persondata is supposed to be used with publicly known information on important figures, rather than to promote crazy stalking actions by wikipedians for research (that's be original research, anyhow). If you think any clarifications need making to the proposal, speak up. LinaMishima 22:36, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I didn't choose you at all, some other IP user, listed above, decided to link to the policy. I added the clarification note, as I suspected they were somehow attempting to complain about the addition of Persondata, and I did not want to be seen as trying to fight against a valuable idea. Feel free to ignore all this :) LinaMishima 01:30, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, when you said "author of the above", I thought you meant the comment (and that you forgot to log in or something). Well, it was late at night!

I know I left a note for someone who removed persondata from Ian McDiarmid, but as the other editor said, all the persondata information was already in the article anyway. I just pointed out that the persondata is intended to duplicate information as it's for a different purpose. User:B cubed has now added the persondata back anyway. JRawle (Talk) 11:56, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I've no idea what 81.129.195.254 (talk • contribs) is referring to. Therefore I'm going to WP:AGF and assume it was left on my talk page by mistake. JRawle (Talk) 12:07, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

British Humanist Association

Hi there J - have added a link on the BHA page in order to elucidate those who want to know more about 'Distinguished Supporters' and what it entails. Hope that helps!