Talk:Baron Byron

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.

Biography: Military / 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 the military biography work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage (assessed as Low-importance).

Fair use rationale for Image:Baron Byron coa.png

Image:Baron Byron coa.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:36, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have now "closed up the gap with our English (and Australian) dead"

John Byron, 1st Baron Byron (1599–1652) —[pre-existing]
Richard Byron, 2nd Baron Byron (1606–1679) —NEW
William Byron, 3rd Baron Byron (1636–1695) —NEW
William Byron, 4th Baron Byron (1669–1736) —NEW
William Byron, 5th Baron Byron (1722–1798) —[pre-existing]
George Gordon Byron, 6th Baron Byron (1788–1824) —[pre-existing]
George Anson Byron, 7th Baron Byron (1789–1868) —[pre-existing]
George Anson Byron, 8th Baron Byron (1818–1870) —NEW
George Frederick William Byron, 9th Baron Byron (1855–1917) —NEW
Frederick Ernest Charles Byron, 10th Baron Byron (1861–1949) —NEW
Rupert Frederick George Byron, 11th Baron Byron (1903–1983) —former stub
Richard Geoffrey Gordon Byron, 12th Baron Byron (1899–1989) —NEW
Robert James Byron, 13th Baron Byron (b. 1950) —[pre-existing]

Of the Barons Byron listed, most articles did not exist a couple of days ago, and one that did was a stub... so I've filled in the gaps, and tried to get everything at least past "stub" (to "start") class, expanding or enhancing or tidying up some of the rest along the way, for instance creating disambiguation pages for common names in the family, like "George Byron" and "John Byron". More eyes are always welcome. Please check my work, spot errors, find areas for improvement, etc. These are still woefully short articles. Can we find more details? Illustrations? Other features? — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 03:34, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(of the poet) "... commonly known as Lord Byron"

The problem with adding "commonly known as Lord Byron" next to just one of the Barons Byron is that each of them was commonly known (and addressed) by that honorific during their incumbency as Baron, between succeeding to the title and dying themselves, as is the present Baron Byron today. The poet's cousin and successor commanded a Royal Navy ship to Hawaii; there is a book about it titled With Lord Byron at the Sandwich Islands in 1825, ISBN 9780554605265; read more about the voyage at HMS Blonde (1819)#Voyage to Hawaii. The poet's great-uncle and predecessor, the "Wicked Lord" or "Devil Byron", is referred to as "Lord Byron" throughout his own article. I think it would be a capital mistake, inducing confusion, to encourage people to lean upon a shared term ("Lord Byron") rather than his distinctive individual name ("George Gordon Byron"), to identify the poet. — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 05:02, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the Lord Byron, that is the poet, is an exceptional case. However, if having it there in the list of Barons Byron weakens the article or weakens the encyclopedia then remove it. I would like to see the hat-note stay though. Hatnotes of this type are to send people who land on the wrong page on their way quickly and efficiently. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 05:06, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re: changes: not what I would prefer but you know this article and subject matter better than I do. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 05:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the idea of hatnote and additional note by listing entry, each saying in effect "the poet's over HERE!", was excellent, I'm very grateful to you for adding both, and glad to keep both. It's just the idea of referring to only one man as "Lord Byron" in an article full of Lords Byron that I can't fathom. Especially since a series of other men have held the title since 1824, and one holds it today (the best claim of all). It's like saying the term "Mister President" should redirect to Abraham Lincoln because he's the President you think of first, never mind all the other Presidents there have been, or the one there is now. — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 05:43, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]