BrownHairedGirl (talk | contribs) →Requested move: he had the title for 41 years of his 89-years lifespan, so for most of his adult life he was Lord Moyola |
Lucy-marie (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
'''Comment''' - Only reading the naming convention ignores the fact that the common name policy states the common name should be used over rarer more formal versions.--[[User:Lucy-marie|Lucy-marie]] ([[User talk:Lucy-marie|talk]]) 17:05, 30 December 2010 (UTC) |
'''Comment''' - Only reading the naming convention ignores the fact that the common name policy states the common name should be used over rarer more formal versions.--[[User:Lucy-marie|Lucy-marie]] ([[User talk:Lucy-marie|talk]]) 17:05, 30 December 2010 (UTC) |
||
*:The guideline has been drawn up in full knowledge of [[WP:COMMONNAME]], and documents the consensus on how to title articles on peers. You offer no reason to make an exception to [[WP:NCPEER]] in this case, just a blanket determination to ignore it, as demonstrated by your [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=move&user=Lucy-marie&page=&year=&month=-1&tagfilter=&hide_patrol_log=1&hide_review_log=1 mass-renamings of articles on peers], including [[Thomas Galbraith, 2nd Baron Strathclyde]], who inherited his peerage at age 25, has been known throughout his political career by his title ... yet you still moved him in two steps [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thomas_Galbraith,_2nd_Baron_Strathclyde&diff=399711654&oldid=398214643] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thomas_Galbraith,_2nd_Baron_Strathclyde&diff=399711885&oldid=399711654] to [[Thomas Galbraith (Born 1960)]]. You did the same thing with [[Elizabeth Symons, Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean]], moving her [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elizabeth_Symons,_Baroness_Symons_of_Vernham_Dean&diff=400118308&oldid=394712750] to [[Elizabeth Symons]], despite her having been a life pper since 1996, and notable under her title Baroness as a government minister from 1997 to at least 2003.<br />Your arguments about policy are simply bogus, because your move log shows that you just don't want any articles to have a peerage title, regardless of how long they have been known by their peerage title. --02:27, 31 December 2010 (UTC) |
*:The guideline has been drawn up in full knowledge of [[WP:COMMONNAME]], and documents the consensus on how to title articles on peers. You offer no reason to make an exception to [[WP:NCPEER]] in this case, just a blanket determination to ignore it, as demonstrated by your [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=move&user=Lucy-marie&page=&year=&month=-1&tagfilter=&hide_patrol_log=1&hide_review_log=1 mass-renamings of articles on peers], including [[Thomas Galbraith, 2nd Baron Strathclyde]], who inherited his peerage at age 25, has been known throughout his political career by his title ... yet you still moved him in two steps [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thomas_Galbraith,_2nd_Baron_Strathclyde&diff=399711654&oldid=398214643] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thomas_Galbraith,_2nd_Baron_Strathclyde&diff=399711885&oldid=399711654] to [[Thomas Galbraith (Born 1960)]]. You did the same thing with [[Elizabeth Symons, Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean]], moving her [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elizabeth_Symons,_Baroness_Symons_of_Vernham_Dean&diff=400118308&oldid=394712750] to [[Elizabeth Symons]], despite her having been a life pper since 1996, and notable under her title Baroness as a government minister from 1997 to at least 2003.<br />Your arguments about policy are simply bogus, because your move log shows that you just don't want any articles to have a peerage title, regardless of how long they have been known by their peerage title. --02:27, 31 December 2010 (UTC) |
||
::Complete nonsence, the policy is being ignored and the convention is taking precedence. Where peerage titles are the common name then the peerage naming convention comes in. The naming convention is how to format the titles of the articles as opposed to being the way article of peers must be titled. The common name policy comes first, and if the peerage title is the common name then the naming convention dictates how to format the title, not the convention coming first.--[[User:Lucy-marie|Lucy-marie]] ([[User talk:Lucy-marie|talk]]) 17:09, 31 December 2010 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Comment'''. Still not sure which way to go with this one. Yes, JCC was best known as PM of NI, without his title. OTOH he had the title for 41 years of his 89-years lifespan, so for most of his adult life he was Lord Moyola ... and that makes me lean to using the title, as was the case for three years. --[[User:BrownHairedGirl|<span style="color:#996600; cursor: not-allowed;">Brown</span>HairedGirl]] <small>[[User_talk:BrownHairedGirl|(talk)]] • ([[Special:Contributions/BrownHairedGirl|contribs]])</small> 02:45, 31 December 2010 (UTC) |
*'''Comment'''. Still not sure which way to go with this one. Yes, JCC was best known as PM of NI, without his title. OTOH he had the title for 41 years of his 89-years lifespan, so for most of his adult life he was Lord Moyola ... and that makes me lean to using the title, as was the case for three years. --[[User:BrownHairedGirl|<span style="color:#996600; cursor: not-allowed;">Brown</span>HairedGirl]] <small>[[User_talk:BrownHairedGirl|(talk)]] • ([[Special:Contributions/BrownHairedGirl|contribs]])</small> 02:45, 31 December 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:10, 31 December 2010
![]() | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Marquess of Donegall
Was Chichester-Clark related to the Marquess of Donegall Chichesters? Stu ’Bout ye! 15:11, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- I think so, I'll check tonight. I know he was related to Sir Arthur Chichester so it seems likley.Traditional unionist 18:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, he was. --Counter-revolutionary 20:22, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Sir Arthur Chichester had no children, so I'm guessing Chichester-Clark was a direct descendant of one of Sir Arthur's siblings? Either John or Edward? Stu ’Bout ye! 09:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed, as are the Donegall family. --Counter-revolutionary 13:59, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Sir Arthur Chichester had no children, so I'm guessing Chichester-Clark was a direct descendant of one of Sir Arthur's siblings? Either John or Edward? Stu ’Bout ye! 09:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, he was. --Counter-revolutionary 20:22, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
The (crap) biography written of C-C says he is a direct decendant of Sir Arthur Chichester.Traditional unionist 14:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- He has no children. --Counter-revolutionary 16:34, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Family
I thought there was a section on his marriage, &c., in here, but it seems to have disappeared. --Counter-revolutionary (talk) 14:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
The consensus is not to use the title of nobility in the article title in the case of former senior politicians who were only given the title after they retired from front-line politics. PatGallacher (talk) 12:37, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
- reference? Kittybrewster ☎ 12:51, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, see WP:NCROY. PatGallacher (talk) 12:56, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Requested move
James Chichester-Clark → James Chichester-Clark, Baron Moyola —. The page has recently been moved several times in quick succession, so I have protected it for 2 weeks against further moves. This discussion will allow editors to seek a consensus on what the article title should be, and the protection does not prejudice the outcome of that discussion.
from the move logs [1] and [2], it would appear that from the title "James Chichester-Clark, Baron Moyola" was the stable title from 2007 to 2010. I have not personally formed a view on how I think the page should be named, but may do so in the course of this discussion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:45, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
- Support per WP:NCPEER. Kittybrewster ☎ 21:10, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
- Comment' - Would you mind elaborating please, as to how the naming convention is relevant to this issue and what points of the naming convention are the grounds for your argument.--Lucy-marie (talk) 21:23, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
- Comment. No. I have answered at Dee Doocey. You are just trying to scatter the text. Kittybrewster ☎ 21:26, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
- Each request is unique and the arguments used on one request cannot be used on another unless they are explicitly made on that individual request. In this case there will be some repetition with regards to similar requests the same users are involved in.--Lucy-marie (talk) 22:47, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
- Comment. "Members of the British Peerage, whether hereditary peers or life peers, usually have their articles titled "Personal name, Ordinal (if appropriate) Peerage title", e.g. Alun Gwynne Jones, Baron Chalfont" Kittybrewster ☎ 21:22, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
- Comment' - Would you mind elaborating please, as to how the naming convention is relevant to this issue and what points of the naming convention are the grounds for your argument.--Lucy-marie (talk) 21:23, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
- Support- On the basis of the cited guidelines, it would seem that it should be moved. He was known exclusively as Lord Moyola once his peerage was granted - see, for example, his obituary in the Guardian - http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/2002/may/20/guardianobituaries.northernireland, which is titled "Lord Moyola." Counter-revolutionary (talk) 22:44, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose by my reading of NCPEER. Kittybrewster, this is quoting out of context, look at what it says just after this about e.g. Margaret Thatcher. Where is the evidence that he was know exclusively as Lord Moyola after his peerage was granted? One obituary does not clinch the argument. When I saw the obituary of Lord Moyola in the Guardian I had never heard of this person before, it was only when I started reading it I realised that this was Major Chichester-Clark. PatGallacher (talk) 23:54, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
- 'Where is the evidence that he was know exclusively as Lord Moyola after his peerage was granted?' NCPEER works the other way - 'peers who are almost exclusively known by their personal names have their articles so titled' Otherwise titles are used. Garlicplanting (talk) 16:37, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose - The main time of his political career he was not a peer and was simply known without any formal title. When researching the history of Northern Ireland he will be listed without the title as he was not ennobled when he held the position. To add the title just because he is was a peer over what he is commonly known as is ludicrous, confusing and not helpful to the outside user.--Lucy-marie (talk) 01:39, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
- Support - the way the policy is worded is that the default position is for the peerage to be used after the name, only in special cases should that be departed from. While this would be a borderline case on those grounds (Prime Ministerial candidates probably fall into the spirit of the exception no matter how short a period they were in office or how small the Government), it still seems to fall into the broader category to me.Traditional unionist (talk) 02:08, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Support For now at least - i'll have a better look when I have time. As above the policy works on the presumption of using the title not as PatGallacher suggests Garlicplanting (talk) 16:37, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment - Only reading the naming convention ignores the fact that the common name policy states the common name should be used over rarer more formal versions.--Lucy-marie (talk) 17:05, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
- The guideline has been drawn up in full knowledge of WP:COMMONNAME, and documents the consensus on how to title articles on peers. You offer no reason to make an exception to WP:NCPEER in this case, just a blanket determination to ignore it, as demonstrated by your mass-renamings of articles on peers, including Thomas Galbraith, 2nd Baron Strathclyde, who inherited his peerage at age 25, has been known throughout his political career by his title ... yet you still moved him in two steps [3] [4] to Thomas Galbraith (Born 1960). You did the same thing with Elizabeth Symons, Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean, moving her [5] to Elizabeth Symons, despite her having been a life pper since 1996, and notable under her title Baroness as a government minister from 1997 to at least 2003.
Your arguments about policy are simply bogus, because your move log shows that you just don't want any articles to have a peerage title, regardless of how long they have been known by their peerage title. --02:27, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
- The guideline has been drawn up in full knowledge of WP:COMMONNAME, and documents the consensus on how to title articles on peers. You offer no reason to make an exception to WP:NCPEER in this case, just a blanket determination to ignore it, as demonstrated by your mass-renamings of articles on peers, including Thomas Galbraith, 2nd Baron Strathclyde, who inherited his peerage at age 25, has been known throughout his political career by his title ... yet you still moved him in two steps [3] [4] to Thomas Galbraith (Born 1960). You did the same thing with Elizabeth Symons, Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean, moving her [5] to Elizabeth Symons, despite her having been a life pper since 1996, and notable under her title Baroness as a government minister from 1997 to at least 2003.
- Complete nonsence, the policy is being ignored and the convention is taking precedence. Where peerage titles are the common name then the peerage naming convention comes in. The naming convention is how to format the titles of the articles as opposed to being the way article of peers must be titled. The common name policy comes first, and if the peerage title is the common name then the naming convention dictates how to format the title, not the convention coming first.--Lucy-marie (talk) 17:09, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
- Comment. Still not sure which way to go with this one. Yes, JCC was best known as PM of NI, without his title. OTOH he had the title for 41 years of his 89-years lifespan, so for most of his adult life he was Lord Moyola ... and that makes me lean to using the title, as was the case for three years. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:45, 31 December 2010 (UTC)