Talk:Court of St James's
|This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, realise, defence, artefact), and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Firstly, St. is the bane of my existence. St Andrews, where I study, is St, not St., as St. defines the definition of street. The correct form is St
Secondly, should it not be Court of St James'. Surely James' denotes "of James"? I recommend this be moved to "Court of St James'" M0RHI 22:14, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not sure about the St/St. thing but it's certainly James's - see St. James's Palace. Craigy (talk) 04:06, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- As for "St." being 'wrong', I'm sorry but you're entirely incorrect. All official usage (signs, letterpaper, etc.) refers to the Palace with the dot. It's a very modern idea that this is somehow wrong, and one that doesn't curry favour with quite a few of us.
- All applicable Underground stations articles are similarly named, and a good deal of the churches'; a more coherent naming strategy would be good, though. :-)
- James F. (talk) 06:47, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
- Everything does seem entirely inconsistent in this world! As I earlier mentioned, I go to the University of St Andrews, in St Andrews, and I am a member of the United College of St Salvator and St Leonard. It just seemed bizarre that some could be called "St" and some "St.", although I guess this is just one of the many anomalies that lie in the English language! M0RHI 14:25, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
- I know the Brits tend to leave periods out often, even in such things as St Andrews, Dr Jones, or Mr Smith. But technically, officially, the period denotes an abbreviation. "St." does not only mean "Street"; it also means "Saint." St, Mr, and Dr are not words unto themselves, they are abbreviations, and should be given periods. But then, what do I know? I'm just a Yankee. Meanwhile, I do not presume to know anything about the specific case of St. James's Palace, but I do believe that when a name ends in "s", the "s" after the apostrophe is omitted. Jesus' (not Jesus's) is a good example. LordAmeth 12:42, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
According to Time magazine, March 14, 1938, The Court of St. James's changed its official name to The Court of St. James in 1913. Regardless, if "Court of St. James" is an established usage, it should not be described as "incorrect"; English speakers often refer to Deutschland as Germany, but that is not "incorrect". Nareek 17:44, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- The "of" grammatical configuration indicates the possessive. This is a double possessive name. The bicycle of Jim's is a an equivalant and equally erroneous construction.
- As the official royal website calls it Court of St. James's whenever it is referenced (see here for a couple ) i.e. the Court of St. James's Palace and official documents all call it by that name it has to say at the Court of St. James's page. ThinkingTwice contribs | talk 19:25, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
- With regard to the "St" vs "St." debate, US and British English differs. Correct US English tends to use a full stop (period) in all cases. Correct British usage sees a full stop used only if a word is abbreviated by truncation, i.e. the first few letters are used before the word is cut off "mid-flow", such as Rev., Hon., Prof., etc. A full stop is not used if a word is abrbreviated by contraction, i.e. some letters have been removed from the middle of the word but the last letter of the word is still present. Examples in this case include Mr, Dr, Revd, St, Jr, etc. Some people suggest Street is abbreviated to St. in British English with a "superfluous" full stop in order to differentiate it from Saint (St). That seems unlikely to me, as there are few (if any) occasions when ambiguitity could arise. Personally, I believe the case is that that the words are abbreviated differently: SainT and STreet.
Number of foreign missions
Hi, in the text I read "In 2009 there were 172 foreign missions ... This total was made up of 46 high commissions ... and 128 embassies ...". 46+128=174, which is not equal to the 172. Could someone please enlighten this? Thank you. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 22:36, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
naming the court
I think that some statements in the article are nonsense. A static name was not needed for a Court often on the move, nor was it chosen because of the Master of Ceremonies. It was ,and remains, the senior royal residence, and hence the name of the court. Also, high commissioners are not accredited at Court, but are exchanged by governments. It would be impossible,say, for the Canadian high commissioner to be accredited at the Court as that would mean he represents the Canadian Queen at her own Court. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 22:44, 9 November 2012 (UTC)