Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:27, 29 January 2007

Please note: I reserve the right to remove and/or edit and/or merge comments on this page. I welcome folks correcting my numerous spelling mistakes whether on talk pages or otherwise.

Re: Dalrymple Arbuthnot

Oh, and let me congratulate you on the Arbuthnot family series! Didn't mean to just jump in with questions. But I do have some on Dalrymple Arbuthnot such that I felt I had to put a verify tag on the article. The questions are on the article's talk (discussion) page, looking forward to working with you on clearing up these questions. Herostratus 21:47, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Proper designation for Baronets?

I'm given to understand that the usual designation in the UK (and the Commonwealth, I suppose) for Baronets is:

• Sir Arbuthnot, Bt

However, for the edification of our American readers (of which I am one), I would like to spell out the title, as shown below. I assume that this is OK since it is just enlarging an abbreviation, right? Like this:

• Sir Arbuthnot, Baronet

But, I would prefer to be even more specific. I guess that Baronets don't have a geographic designation as part of their name? Which seems very confusing to me. So, are any of these designations proper?:

• Sir Arbuthnot, Baronet of Edinburgh
• Sir Arbuthnot, nth Baronet of Edinburgh
• Sir Arbuthnot, Baronet Arbuthnot of Edinburgh
• Sir Arbuthnot, nth Baronet Arbuthnot of Edinburgh

Or is there another convention that can be used to differentiate (say) a Baronet of Edinburgh from a Baronet of Kittybrewster? Get back to me when you can! Thanks! Herostratus 17:51, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

All Baronetcies have a territorial designation (as do most peerages except, I think, Royal ones). Largely to distinguish one nth Baronet from another of the same forename/surname. So the correct description would be

• Sir Arbuthnot, 2nd Baronet of Edinburgh

and/or * Sir Arbuthnot of Edinburgh, 2nd Baronet

User:Kittybrewster 23:32, 20 January 2006

May need to refer to the manual of style/seek agreement to sort this. At the moment this article jumps about in the designation from Sir William Arbuthnot, 1st Baronet to Sir Dalrymple Arbuthnot, CMG, DSO, JP...the 5th Baronet Arbuthnot of Edinburgh.

Personally when I add them I use but either way the second option is confusing. If we are going to include post nominals (which I'm perfectly happy with) then it should read Sir Dalrymple Arbuthnot Bt, CMG, DSO, JP irrespective of whether you want to add the Baronet Arbuthnot of Edinburgh bit. That of course then makes the use of the full baronet in the firt example look odd Alci12 12:23, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

The order is clear - Bt precedes CMG, etc. Bt preferable to Bart. Bt or Baronet both correct. No mention of Bt is an error. The territorial designation is official and is the one part of the name that cannot be changed. - Kittybrewster 02:42, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Looking for articles to work on?

Hello, Kittybrewster. I'm SuggestBot, a Misplaced Pages bot that helps new members contribute to Misplaced Pages. You might like to edit these articles I picked for you based on things you've edited in the past. Check it out -- I hope you find it useful. -- SuggestBot 14:56, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

dsp

LOL whew. I was worried about all those Arbuthnots disappearing into the highland fog of a dark night... good material for a novel maybe. OK thanks. Since you're back, I see that user Perfecto put needs-verification tags on John Arbuthnott, 8th Viscount of Arbuthnott and John Arbuthnott, 16th Viscount of Arbuthnott , the questions are on the talk page. Some may be hard to answer but if anyone can it would be you, I guess. There is also a verification tag on Alexander Arbuthnot (printer), good luck finding new information on that one. Carry on! Herostratus 23:12, 26 January 2006 (UTC) P.S. I wouldn't worry about Perfecto's message, above, I think he was being a bit overzealous in this case. The rule is designed to prevent people linking to their blogs and advertising sites and suchnot, doesn't apply to the Arbuthnot family database. Herostratus

The heraldry series

How do I amend the box so Mon (crest) reads Mon (badge) ? Kittybrewster 14:12, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

The "box" is Template:heraldry. Just go there and amend the link, or ask for further assistance.Commander Keane 14:18, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

How do I amend the title of file http://en.wikipedia.org/Image:Deke_Crest.JPG which is not a crest ? Kittybrewster 00:03, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

You can't move images, so the only way to rename it is to:

• Save the image to your computer
• Upload it under a new file name in Misplaced Pages
• Transfer the information from the old version (eg who uploaded it in the first place)
• Change all occurences in articles of the old file name to the new name
• Ask an admin to delete the old file.

But then again, the image filename is just a description, not a defintion, so a rename may not be necessary.--Commander Keane 00:10, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Arbuthnot(t)s

Thanks and Bravo! for what i know was a lot of grueling, dull work at List of people by name: Arb. I almost didn't need to look at your last 10 edits, but i wanted to be sure you hadn't been timid enuf to leave the C-U notices in place. Thanks again.
--Jerzy•t 15:40, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

List of acronyms and initialisms

Read the intro; (i) is not a numbering scheme but stands for "initialism". Urhixidur 13:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Quite right; I cottoned onto that 10 pages later. Kittybrewster 13:56, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

John Brooke-Little

Greetings...with your interest in heraldry, I thought you might like to join in the peer review of John Brooke-Little's article. Your input would be greatly appreciated. Keep up the great work.--Evadb 15:10, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Land Law Act

The reason I'd been a little reluctant to just edit was I couldn't find the land law act mentioned to see why this confusion existed. It would make it much easier to see how to edit it had I been clear here.

The 100 yr rule is basically this. During the late C19 early C20 a number of peerages that had been in abeyance for hundreds of years and that often the claimant represented a tiny fraction of the co-share of the title were terminated. Those seeking the terminations were often simply those who had the money to research hundreds of years of decent. The CFP recommended to the King - who agreed and instructed the Attorney General - not to present claims for terminations to him that:

• Had been abeyant for >100 years
• The claimant hadn't a 1/3 share or greater
• If there was any suggestion that claimants had agreed to split titles between them - which had certainly happened.

These 'rules' are still in place although they have been slightly relaxed. In 1999 one of four sisters (1/4 share) of the 9th Baron Howard de Walden succeeded with her petition. I suspect that this was only because they were sisters.

As an example of a simple 1/2 share that can't be terminated under the above 'rules' look at Baron_Clifford As I said on topic if one heir could just renounce it would make life a lot easier but I just can't find any evidence that any act so infringes on the royal perogative.Alci12 19:01, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

David Hasselhoff

User: Wsgweg has vandalised the David Hasselhoff page again. User:Jokestress has reverted it. How do I Vandalism template 5 User:Wsgweg or encourage a moderator to intervene? - Kittybrewster 18:05, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Okay, you have to use a fourth level warning like {{test4}} or {{test4im}}. If he/she still continues, report them at WP:AIV. Thanks. Computerjoe's talk 18:12, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I came to say the same thing! I just happened upon the page, but if it's on AIV, they will watch it. Jokestress 18:14, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

As I said, I was browsing and saw the vandalism. When you find a vandalized page:

1. go to the history
2. find the last unvandalized copy
3. open it for editing
4. select all the text
5. copy it
6. go to the current version of the article
7. open it for editing
8. select all the text
9. paste the text from the unvandalized version
10. note you were reverting vandalism in the edit summary
11. save page
12. put a comment on the vandal's talk page

Sounds like a lot, but it takes about 20 seconds once you have done it. Happy editing! Jokestress 18:40, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Or you can just save the old unvandalized version. It's a lot faster. Also, you should try Popups.—G.He_(Talk!) 04:15, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

GHe is right, but i'd state it as "skip steos 4-9", leaving

1. go to the history
2. find the last unvandalized copy
3. open it for editing
4. note you were reverting vandalism in the edit summary
5. save page
6. put a comment on the vandal's talk page (provided that final step doesn't deter you from carrying out the previous ones)

--Jerzy•t 15:13, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

re:Dalrymple Arbuthnot

Excellent. I don't have a single thing to complain about. It's turned into a fine article, thanks and congratulations.

I wonder if you could find a portrait. In the U.S., pictures made by the government (including military portraits) are public domain, I think. I don't know if that's true in the UK. Herostratus 23:43, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Useful template

You may be interested in Template:Notable Wikipedian, since I see you've dropped in a stub for your own bio. Best, Choess 00:26, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Hivemind

Do you hate me, or do you hate copyright law? --Daniel Brandt 68.91.255.70 15:38, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I think I do not know you; I don't hate anyone, let alone those I do not know. NOr do I hate copyright law. What is Hivemind? Kittybrewster 15:43, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

It rings a vague bell in my mind re Orson Scott Card's Speaker for the Dead.
--Jerzy•t 15:03, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar awarded

I just wanted to let you know that you have been awarded a barnstar. It is in your barstar page now. Best, Kukini 17:31, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Much appreciated. Kittybrewster 00:34, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

My pleasure, you derserve it. Barnstar Brigader, Kukini 04:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Sir William Arbuthnot, 2nd Baronet

Gosh, it's somehow refreshingly embarrassing to begin trying to break the habit of thinking of you as "the lovely Ms. Brewster"! I'm trying to decide whether that means i should have looked at your user pages earlier....
Thanks again for all those entries!
--Jerzy•t 14:59, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Blue frog

please read this 72.145.155.253 01:26, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't know why I got that message on my talk page, but the reason I added it was that at the time it was a fear with many people. It was removed by - I think that user above this message - which I feel was wrong, seeing as the program won't work without Blue Security, encuraging people to uninstall it is absolutly a good practice. If I am wrong, please correct me. Havok (T/C/c) 06:45, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Bluebell Madonna

I moved the comment you left on this article (presumably related to its proposed deletion) into a {{prod2a}} tag. It's better to leave such comments in a prod2a tag in case someone deprods later, so the comment gets removed then too. Just letting you know... not a lot of people have seen the prod2a tag yet. :) Cheers! Mangojuice 20:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Baronet succession style

Please refer to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Peerage#Succession 2. Thanks, Choess 15:54, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I was so long in getting back to you. User:Proteus has some deep-seated objection to the use of territorial designations in article titles, I suppose because they're unofficial; you'll have to take it up with him, although I believe he's on wikibreak at present. And aren't the Carnegie Baronets of Pitarrow? That appears to be the placename; Pitcarrow looks like a typo by Rayment or his sources. Choess 21:29, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Pitarrow - you are right. SCB was wrong. Territorial designations are not unofficial. They are chosen by the first incumbent in consultation with the King at Arms, and allocated by the King at Arms on behalf of the Monarch. My father's hangs on my wall. Prior to his baronetcy and matriculation he had no t.d.. It is the one part of the Baronetcy that cannot be changed. E.G. Baronets Barrow of Highgrove became Crawley-Boevey of Highgrove. - Kittybrewster 02:29, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps you can explain what's going on with Talk:Anstruther_Baronets where the designation seems to change in 1698 for or by what I'm still not clear. Scottish peerages have strange rules what with regrants whereas English titles have always been fixed in stone - does the same apply to scottish bts prior to union?

I will peruse "Anstruthers of that Ilk" which is in my library in London (I am in Scotland).

As a two for one offer - do you know of anything about stripping bts of their titles. It can be done by the monarch for all knighthoods and honours afaik - the exception being peerages that the HoL ruled needs an act of parliament. I know of no similar ruling for Bts

I am not aware that any Bt has been stripped. Ask chairman at baronetage.org

Proteus will no doubt jump in but I don't think tds are that good for disamb at all. Giving people a choice of John Smith of Bognor or John Smith of Clapham will mean next to nothing to 99.99% of users while most people given John Smith (tinker tailor soldier spy) probably know which they are after. Obviously I'm oversimplifying but disamb needs to helpful to the user. Alci12 23:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I think Proteus would agree with you. But on different grounds. I don't. All that is needed is a line at the top as in ], saying e.g. "For Sir John Smith (tinker) see Sir John Smith of Clapham". - Kittybrewster 23:12, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

re: Spouses

Hi Kittybrewster. Er, I didn't delete any spouses, unless I misremember. I keep a spouse list at User:Herostratus/List of non-notable spouses with my own personal rating of spouses, but it's not a Misplaced Pages standard or anything, just a sort of hobby thing, for anyone to use or not as they wish. Maybe you are referring to that? Herostratus 17:20, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Bobby Sands

If you're feeling adventurous, you could help by keeping an eye on this page. I've tried to tone down the more obvious POV elements, but I can see that it is going to be a long process. --Major Bonkers 11:44, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks. --Major Bonkers 08:15, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate your addition to my talk page comment, but perhaps in future you could drop me a line personally instead of putting words in my mouth for me? Wally 06:49, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what this is about: looking at Wally's discussion page history, there seems to have been some vandalism, now reverted, but I didn't do it, and I'm fairly sure that Kittybrewster didn't either. Am I missing something? Given that Wally seems rather upset, perhaps he could set out exactly what the problem is. --Major Bonkers 16:09, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

No, I meant on the Bobby sands talk page itself. And I'm not upset, as it was a minor thing and a perfectly legitimate correction of a statement I made; I just wish the correction had been made to me, not for me, is all. Wally 16:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Help! --Major Bonkers 13:50, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Scams

I hope you can see where I'm coming from, in terms of sorting out the fake from the misrepresented to the misunderstood. I mentioned the afd to Proteus but he seemed to think it would only be re-added so perhaps it should be edited to explain it as a scam. It was sent to afd before and was kept! I'm just not sure the best way to sort things like this. Alci12 13:56, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

"Many people contend that without proper authentication and recognition from an internationally accepted source, this is widely regarded as a fake title. Those who have bought one will doubtless disagree." Sounds good to me, I was trying to think of the least libelous way of saying what we think it is :) Alci12 08:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Concerning your Portal Proposal

I noticed you proposed Portal:Family law and it was summarily blocked by those who opposed it. This appears to have been in violation of Misplaced Pages's policy Misplaced Pages is not censored. Therefore I've nominated the portal approval process page for deletion. The discussion and voting page can be found at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Portal/Proposals. --Transhumanist 16:51, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

RE: MC, DSO, DSC and DFC Recipients

Well, Sir, there is WP:AWB which isn't a robot but is much easier than manually going through all recipients (and I've no idea how to use a bot). I've got some spare summer weeks at the moment so could have a shot at it in the next two weeks. :-) Craigy (talk) 20:14, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Category:Military Cross recipients should probably be moved (as should others, mutatis mutandis) to Category:Recipients of the Military Cross and made a subcat of Category:British honours system for consistency with other categories there, such as Category:Recipients of the Territorial Decoration. Choess 18:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I am happy to agree with you, except that some of them, e.g. DSO are Companions of rather than recipients of ... - Kittybrewster 18:27, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, right. We already have Category:Companions of the Distinguished Service Order, which I think is the only case in which that applies (i.e., award of the decoration entails entry into an order). Maybe categories for the obsolete decorations, such as the Military Medal and brethren? And Template:Catmore should be used in all the categories. Choess 19:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

re: Jejeebhoy Baronets

Hi Kittybrewster... my message page is messed up, but anyway, I was going to say you could move Jejeebhoy Baronets yourself, but it looks like you figured that out anyway. Cheers! Herostratus 19:47, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

John Brooke-Little

--Forlornandshorn 16:19, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Hugh Gough, 3rd Viscount Gough

The information for this article seems to have been picked from www.kittybrewster.com/members/j.htm, which does not inform if that information is public domain or copyrighted (the terms of use are really vague). Could you rewrite the article to prevent giving a positive again? Thanks. -- ReyBrujo 14:35, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes - my site. All that info is public domain (Burke's Peerage, "Who's Who" The Peerage etc - Kittybrewster 16:22, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

This seems a bordeline case, as you have been researching that information, and since you are adding it to Misplaced Pages, it may be original research. However, right now I am interested in the copyright of the site. Is there any section in the site where it is clearly stated that the information is Public Domain? -- ReyBrujo 17:21, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

No. Because most of the info on my sites is not public domain. But the info re HG,3VG certainly is. I am inclined to ask do we need to worry about it? - Kittybrewster 17:27, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, because all text that is inserted in Misplaced Pages must be licensed under the GFDL. If it is an exact copy of information, it is assumed the site released that information with the GFDL license (or Public Domain). In the future, this may trigger new false positive hits for copyright bots like Wherebot. I suggest adding a note in the talk page of the article stating that the information was public domain. -- ReyBrujo 18:05, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Baronets

See my belated reply at User talk:BrownHairedGirl#s-reg_s-hon_s-nob. --BrownHairedGirl 18:47, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps this can help Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Peerage (at the bottom of the article). The s-reg-templates for baronetcies are listed on Template:S-reg Phoe 20:13, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Kitty, I have just created an article on a Baronet, and created the relevant baronetcy page too (see John Mellor (politician) and Mellor Baronets). That's my first effort, so doubt I have done it right, but I hope it's some use as a guide! (though you've probabbly figured it out already) --BrownHairedGirl 14:29, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Dyke Acland_Baronets

I note on this entry you mention he obtained a fresh creation. How exactly? What was altered? While Scottish titles have always had regrants I've never seen anything the same for British titles. Alci12 00:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

He obtained new letters patent with precedence the previous patent - Kittybrewster 10:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

So are you saying the old title was extinguished? If so it would point to our previous discussion about how you revoke a baronetcy.Alci12 13:59, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

No; I am merely reporting what I found in Rayment and in Burke's Peerage. The latter says he was both 5th Bt and 1st Bt, and goes on to list everybody after him as 6th, 7th etc (as does Rayment); therefore it was not extinguished or revoked by the later grant. - Kittybrewster 14:03, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Well then I read that as a new creation with the existing title still extant rather than what seemed to be implied ie a regrant/new LP to the existing title. Alci12 15:45, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I am happy to share your view in the absence of other knowledge. - Kittybrewster 16:47, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages

Hi Kitty, are you are of WP:MOSDAB? I have just tidied up John Mellor to unpipe names, add dates, etc, and thought it might help to point you towards that very useful guide. --BrownHairedGirl 13:26, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:Hndis

Hi Kitty, I just tweaked John Arbuthnot (disambiguation) to add the {{hndis}} template, and when I looked at the history, I saw that you had created the page, so I wondered if you knew about hndis. It's preferable to {{disambig}} for dab pages relating to human names, because with hndis the name then gets added to the Category:Lists of ambiguous human names, where I think it gets picked up by various bots who do clever things with it.

The syntax is {{hndis|name=Lastname, firstname}}.

BTW, there's a reply to you on my talk. --BrownHairedGirl 10:56, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Some peerages etc

Hi Kitty, I recently created a few pages for people with peerages correctly, and wasn't sure if I had done the categories etc correctly, so I was wondering if you could be kind enough to take a look at them and see if things are OK:

• Leifchild Stratten Jones, 1st Baron Rhayader
• Ralph Assheton, 1st Baron Clitheroe

Thanks! --BrownHairedGirl 12:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I have deleted Leif-Jones (making him Jones instead) because that isn't in his surname according to one of the two pages. Maybe I did wrongly.

Assheton/Clitheroe could use a Baronetcy and a Peerage succession box. Is it right that Assheton Baronets has been hijacked towards Baron Clitheroe? Maybe it is.

Well done. I think PC should be recognised in top line using Rt Hon - and the Baronetcy also. But see User_talk:Alci12#Rt._Hon. They look pretty good to me. :) - Kittybrewster 14:22, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

To shortcut this see User_talk:Choess#Rt_Hon. for why we can't include it in the first line. 'Sir' is fine for a Baronet but wiki uses 'ordinal Baronet' not 'Bt' in the opening line and never uses Bt where it's a peer. Alci12 15:13, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Kitty -- that looks great!--BrownHairedGirl 16:00, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Category move

I'd agree with that. Proteus (Talk) 20:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Lady and The Hon.

I'm not really sure, to be quite honest. "Lady" seems to go back a long way, certainly to the 15th century and probably much earlier than that, but I really have no idea about "The Honourable". I'd imagine it dates back to a similar time to when Privy Counsellors and Peers started being "The Right Honourable", but when that was I don't know. Sorry about that. Proteus (Talk) 20:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

The memorial to various relatives of Thomas Manners, 1st Earl of Rutland (erected 1591) refers to "the right honourable lord Thomas Earl of Rutland" and his sons "sir Thomas Manners, knight, and Oliver Manners, esq", suggesting it was not then uniformly in use. More or less immediately after Restoration, we find "the Honourable Edward Howard". Chandler's "The History and Proceedings of the House of Commons" first uses that style in the list of MPs in the first parliament of James II. Apparently the Earl of Sandwich's journal of 1660 refers to "Hon. Edward Montagu Esq." (son & heir of Lord Montagu of Boughton). Choess 23:18, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I'd certainly say that it only solidifies post restoration. C16 it's not uncommon to see sons of peers called 'lord' in speech at least and the styles of all peers vary wildly with the whole Thrice Honourable bit for earls and Most High Potent and Noble Prince (or variations) for Dukes. Lady goes back to Anglo Saxon times and in a recognisible form to the c12. Though it is quite hard to seperate the use as a title from a general form of respect at this time. Alci12 15:25, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Lewis Baronets

Hi Kittybrewster, I see that your request on AfD was handled in a somewhat silly fashion by others. Let me know if you want Lewis of Portland Place to remain as a redirect to Lewis Baronets or whether it should be deleted. Thanks -- Samir धर्म 08:49, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Just having a quick scan and a number of things comes to mind. He (Lewis of Senghenydd) presumably can't use his baronetcy because he hasn't (by choice) had himself entered on the roll of baronets according to the rules. I wonder if there might be an error. Quickly checking the list of unproven titles returns

"Lewis of Nantgwyne UK 3rd Baronet died 1977 Dormant"

Now it seems unlikely to me that two baronetcies of the same surname held by the third holder would have both become dormant in the same year. Is it possible that this is the same title and that one or other site has just made an error in the territorial designation? Alci12 12:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree - and Rayment frequently uses territorial designations which are different from those stated by the Standing Council of the Baronetage. - Kittybrewster 14:24, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea how accurate the SCB is with such matters as presumably the whole thing is part time and more of a club than anything. As peers are not unknown for getting their own titles wrong it would hardly shock me if the same weren't true here.

I wonder if Lewis is akin to Beaverbrooke. He renounced the title but accepted both a CBE and DL so it can't be republican feelings but could perhaps be a 'only one peer x in my lifetime and that's my father' Alci12 17:03, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I think SCB would be stunningly acurate. The Council is like a club but the Secretary is broadly Home Office and very official. Lewis of Senghenydd appears to have been given a different TD when he got the Barony. Maybe he feels he only wants to use that which he has earned - as opposed to the counter-view that one uses the title as a living memorial to he who earned it. - Kittybrewster 20:27, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Please visit my user page - Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Baronetcies 10:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Acceptance as a baronet

"Now that the House of Lords has been down-graded it is no longer possible for a hereditary peer to take his seat there. So how does he now prove he has become Lord Bloggs? And if he has proven this, would the SCB accept that proof? - Kittybrewster 09:58, 10 September 2006 (UTC)"

Well, 92 do still take their seats (plus more who are also life peers) and the remainder can vote for those 92. So they all make their claims in the normal way and then sign the peerage roll . I assume that if a baronetcy and a peerage have the same remainder then the official roll of baronet will be updated without seperate proofs for that being needed but I don't know that as fact however the same department handles matters. I don't see the SCB could object as it's the official roll for the peerage or baronetage that matters the SCB would look pretty foolish if they decided to ignore either? Alci12 10:36, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I think some Peers may not see the point in proving their baronetcy which is a pity. I was thinking of someone such as Baron Muskerry which is dormant and not under review. - Kittybrewster 11:01, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Considering how some peers seem to have a pretty weak knowledge of their own titles and correct use thereof I wonder if some even know they have a baronetcy or if they do that they need or prove it. However if there are examples of peers who have proved their claim to the peerage but are not on the baronets roll that would settle the matter of them using cross proof for claims. I thought you had to provide birth/marriage/death + two affis - though I appreciate your case is as simple as they get in terms of proving a claim. Alci12 11:43, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Re abeyance. In theory I suppose but in reality no. No baronetcy has been created other than scottish titles that could pass (as peerages by writ) normally though the female line, so there can be no co-heirs for the title to be split between. Alci12 16:43, 16 September 2006 (UTC).

The House of Lords Privileges Committee is extant and continues to decide upon matters relating to the Peerage &c. Blair's government only expelled the hereditaries from the House of Lords (minus a few left in for the moment). They did not abolish the Peerage, and claims must still be presented in proper legal form to the Committee who make the final decision. It remains illegal to call yourself a Peer or a baronet if it is in dispute. Chelsea Tory 09:20, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Sir Robert Gunning, 1st Baronet

I think it may be correct. I believe, but can't cite, that KBs were upgraded to KCBs and looking at the dates he survived just long enough to see the order split. Looking quickly I can't find something to validate this. Perhaps someone on bath talk can find the statues of 1815 Alci12 09:39, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

No. They were upgraded to GCBs. - Kittybrewster 15:49, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for the Burba, SW! Laura1822 23:21, 24 September 2006 (UTC).

List of baronetcies

Hey, would like to inform you that text on talkpages shall not be removed. If a page becomes too large or something is no longer being discussed, it shall be archived. For doing that see here Misplaced Pages:Talk_page_guidelines#When_pages_get_too_long. Greetings Phoe 22:52, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Hey, it's only acceptable to remove clear vandalism, nonsense or spam from a article's talkpage. Historic and out of date isn't a criteria. It can be that a text is valueless now, once it wasn't (so it belongs to the article's history). Furthermore some users can have the same question in future, can find an answer in this or want to add own thoughts. Archive it, if you think it shall not stand on the talkpage, but deleting such a text is nothing more than vandalism. Phoe 08:51, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

PS... As a compromis: Why do you not put short notices to that texts explaining what is done meanwhile? Phoe 08:56, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Hey, value is always a matter of opinion. I'm sure on earth there are'nt two persons that have the exact same definition of what is valuable and what is not (so you can't know if this will help someone someday). By the way if you see through Misplaced Pages, you will find, especially on talkpages, many texts which are useless, old and unnecessary on a first and second look too, but this plays no role. The thing is: it has been written once, and we have to keep it. Greetings Phoe 13:37, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Excellent solution from my view Phoe 13:08, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Icairns and baronetcies

I suggest you start by discussing the problem directly with the user involved, (see longer reply on my talk), but please get back to me if you get stuck! --BrownHairedGirl 11:42, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

References as requested on my talk, I suggest that you might want to leave a rather more detailed note, explaining which artucle moves you are referring to, and including named links to the guidelines. --BrownHairedGirl 12:06, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the notice. I have copied your statement from User talk:ICairns to User talk:Icairns (the right place). Greetings Phoe 13:08, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh dear God. I can't cope with all of these now, as I'm just about to go out, but I'll fix the rest later. Thanks for the heads up. Proteus (Talk) 16:22, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry Kitty, moving house and only just back in and read the messages. You seem to have solved things well enough. Now if I can only get broadband installed I might be able to get back to some editing. Alci12 16:44, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Knighthoods

Burns was a KCMG, Still was a KCVO, the rest were Knights Bachelor (& Pearce also held the OBE). Thanks. Craigy (talk) 20:40, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello. I search through Burke's or the Gazettes (a great website if you have the patience for it). Craigy (talk) 08:43, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

re: Felicity Arbuthnot

Sorry, I didn't get your message re this article in time. I've been on a bit less lately. You can see who has deleted a file by going to the logs page Special:logs, pulling down Deletion Log in the leftmost box, pasting the name of the article in the Title box, and clicking Go. The article was deleted by User:Eagle 101. It certainly should not have been speedy deleted, in my opinion. What happens, I think, is that when the backlog of articles nominated for speedy deletion gets large enough, an admin cleans it out with perhaps less attention to each article than might be ideal. So I don't see a problem with your re-creating it. Others, however, may delete it out of hand as a re-creation of deleted material. In that case, you should go to deletion review at WP:DRV.

If an article is nominated for speedy deletion, you can put {{hangon}} on the page, and, either on the article's talk page or the talk page of the editor who put on the speedy tag (or both), describe why you think it shouldn't be speedied. The article should not be speedied as long as there is a fruitful discussion ongoing. Usually articles with the hangon tag are sent to WP:AFD to resolve the matter.

Now, as far as surviving a WP:AFD... I can't much help you with that. The comments I made on the category page re keeping all (or at least as many as possible) of the family articles for reasons of possible future detailed research by someone may not hold a lot of water with the AFD commentors. Your best bet, as always, is to try to get as many external citations showing genuine notability. You will probably find in the course of events that not every article can be retained. Herostratus 03:23, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Baronetcies

"ategorising baronets" refers to the fact that a good few of my edits have been used to add Category:Baronets in the Baronetage of Somewhere into biographies, conforming the page title and opening line to MoS standards and adding other pertinent information that I find on things like the ODNB and Rayment. Whilst I'll keep doing this regardless of whether I'm a Project member or not, I figure its best that you people know what I'm doing, and also so that I can have a known and respected voice in discussions over policy that are had. --New Progressive 20:15, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Changing talk pages

It's usually not a good idea to "correct" somebody else's grammar in what they posted on talk pages. An obvious typo, or a link to a page that has subsequently been moved, some of those things are okay, but the ones such as those you made here are best avoided. Just a hint, I'm not going to be following you around and reverting them and no response is necessary; it's discussed somewhere on the help pages if you need more info. Gene Nygaard 13:25, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

re How do I...

1. As far as I know, you can't put a user contributions page on your watchlist, unfortunately. I would be very handy if you could.
2. On user page User:Kittybrewster/monobook.js (create it if it doesn't exist), place this line:

document.write('<SCRIPT SRC="http://sam.zoy.org/wikipedia/godmode-light.js"><\/SCRIPT>');

then save and refresh. Copy in the line from the source of this message (i.e., in edit mode). I don't know if or how well it works, but it's supposed to give you a rollback button such as admins have. Herostratus 02:59, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually it looks like there is a javascript solution which does allow you to watch a user's contributions. Have a look at User:Tra#User_watchlist. --Dr pda 21:31, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Heather Mills allegations of domestic violence

While "denied allegations" should not be placed within wikipedia articles, it probably merits to judge articles on a case by case basis. I am referring to Mill's allegations of domestic violence by Paul McCartney, which you had deleted, because the allegations have been denied.

These allegations are contained within her divorce papers, and merely reporting what she has stated in her divorce papers, doesnot amount to have taken a partisan view. Since these allegations, whether actually true or not, because they are contained within legal papers and because they are being subject to intense discussion, it is necessary to atleast mention about them (along with Paul McCartney or his sources' denials). Here is the news article (Daily Mail had published these leaked charges) . I request you to reconsider your opinion in this regard. rahul regula 13:55, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Of course her allegtions are not NPOV. If they are in legal papers before the family court they should not be discussed outside those proceedings. If they are subject of discussion, they should not be. The only relevant point is that it is acknowledged by both that the marriage has irretrievably broken down. "to at least mention" is a split infinitive. - Kittybrewster 15:39, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

It doesnot matter as to why (or who put)these papers are in the public domain. The fact remains that these papers are in the public domain, and are subject to much intense discussion. Misplaced Pages maynot be a place for gossip, but it certainly is not a place for investigative facts either. What it is known for, is its' unbiased "reporting" of events. Certainly, when more and more people look to Misplaced Pages as a source of reliable information, it is "atleast necessary" to report it. There is a subtle difference between "reporting" and opinionating, and i am afraid, you are not able to see it. Anyway, since u are one of the supposed "gods" of wikipedia, i leave the final decision to your consciousness. Btw, thanks for the service award(s). rahul regula 10:07, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Rahul: see #6 here. -- weirdoactor -- 21:09, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Kennaway Baronets

Hi, thanks for your correction. Good day, month, year Phoe 10:11, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks KB, I was suprised that it seemed to be Escot as it went against all the usual conventions but the error seems widespread in many sources Alci12 12:07, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Patricia Routledge

Thanks for your help on the Patricia Routledge page. Unfortuntley User:SFTVLGUY2 still believes himself to be right, despite the guidelies shown to him. He is also claiming that you, Proteus and myself are the same person. Your help would be appreciated if he continues. Thanks. --Berks105 19:10, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

See my suggestions at Talk:Patricia_Routledge#Content_dispute. --BrownHairedGirl 21:04, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

George Byron, 6th Baron Byron

Good Morning :-) The request of move of the artice above can you find on Talk:George Byron, 6th Baron Byron#Requested move. Perhaps you would like to add your comment from Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Peerage there. Greetings Phoe 00:20, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

sockpuppetry?

Hi Kittybrewster, following up on the comments by User:SFTVLGUY2, I have made some suggestions at Talk:Patricia Routledge#sockpuppetry, which I hope may be helpful to all involved. --BrownHairedGirl 13:12, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Jeffrey Sebelia

Heho, I'm not an admin, but I have reverted the talkpage and added a short notice on Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Maybe it will take some effect. Greetings Phoe 19:46, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you that you have taken my request in the right form. Why I had chosen that form you can read on User_talk:Gh87 (if you want). Greetings Phoe 14:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Earl Nelson

Hi, I have changed the style of what you had added to the article, to stay consistent with other articles, and because the barony and viscountcy was only for life technically (since he did not have legitimate heirs). By the way perhaps this website may intersting for you. Best wishes Phoe 11:46, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Looks like a copy of the usenet peerage group to me, with the poster being michael rhodes. Prob best never to assume 'life' as though I can certainly think of examples where unmarried octagenerains have been given 'life' hereditary peerages I can think of a few peers who have produced their heir at almost the same age. Alci12 21:59, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes it is and it seems it is his own page. I like it more than the usenet group, because it is better readable. :-) ~~ Phoe _talk 00:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC) ~~

Why do you think it will particularly interest me? - Kittybrewster 00:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Probably because he reports the births/marriages/deaths of baronets as well as peers and obviously that catches people before the dead tree publishers do their annual updates Alci12 09:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

No special reason, but you work on articles of peers and baronets, you are a baronet, you understand English :-), so I thought it could be interesting to read for you. ~~ Phoe _talk 11:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC) ~~

Jonathan Porritt's entry defaced?

Seemingly wrong changes are being made in Jonathan Porritt's page, Pot-Porritt is appearing there. I had never heard of the name before, and I've known about the Porritt family for several decades. Google led me to something by Jeremy Clarkson where he used Pot-Porritt, seemingly in derision. Perhaps there's a public feud between them which someone has leaked into the Misplaced Pages entry.

As I live in California, this feud was all a surprise to me. I'm not 100% sure of the situation so don't want to change the Misplaced Pages entry, but thought I should bring it to the attention of someone who has made other changes to Jonathan Porritt's entry.

Kiwicrs 06:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

A Bloody Message For You O.o

A Bloody Message For You O.o

I have been told to ask you to stop "bleeding cut and paste pages moves" and I must say I agree. Bleeding profusely on wikipages will cause wikipedia to become unsanitary. So I must ask you to please stop bleeding on the pages. If necessary, use gloves before you cut and paste. (Actually the original intent of this message is to apologize on this person's behalf and providing humor after his immature attacks on you. Peace. :) -WarthogDemon 09:41, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Cut-paste

Firstly, please stop performing cut-paste moves as you have been doing for some time now.

Secondly, the articles you are doing this at are at the right names. On Misplaced Pages, we do not use titles, such as Sir, Doctor, etc. in article titles. So please stop, before you are blocked for disruption.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:50, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Honorific_prefixes - Kittybrewster 09:51, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (names and titles) is the correct page to go by. The Manual of Style concerns the article verbiage, not the article name.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:52, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Naming_conventions_(names_and_titles)#Other_non-royal_names. No 4. - Kittybrewster 10:33, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

It's Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Peerage#Location 2 that's relevant here. Proteus (Talk) 10:03, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Trevelyans

Hi, I had been meaning to create an article for Sir George Trevelyan, 4th Baronet for a while, and when I saw you'd renamed the other Trevelyans I thought I'd better get on with it. Have also disambig'd lots of George and Charles Trevelyan wikilinks. I really ought to create an article for the place Trevelyan, whence the family take their name. It's a tiny place in Cornwall, but I think notable at the very least for having given the world such an influential family. DuncanHill 14:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Sheriff

Heho, it is explained on High Sheriff. I quote: "In England, Wales and Northern Ireland the High Sheriff is theoretically the Sovereign's judicial representative in the county, while the Lord Lieutenant is the Sovereign's personal representative." Greetings ~~ Phoe _talk 16:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC) ~~

Speedy deletions

The tags are being removed pretty much as soon as he adds them (see Special:Contributions/Lairor for the articles he's been tagging), but it doesn't seem to be stopping him. Proteus (Talk) 13:31, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Other Offices

Why the "Other Offices" title to the succession box? I am not sure what it means. It seems to imply that there should be more than one "office". I like the color it adds to the box, but I just havent a clue what the title is implying. Maybe it should be titled "succession of office", or something like that. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 18:40, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

User:Burkem

I see that you have an interest in genealogy. I have very limited knowledge on the topic, so I am not in a position to discern hoaxes that are not immediately obvious. Are you able to provide evidence that one or more of Burkem's recent articles are hoaxes/unreliable. If so, that would be a great help. If you can do this, I would appreciate it if you would post it on the administrators' notice board (and let me know as well). I am too am concerned about the potential introduction of articles that are based on original research/false. — ERcheck (talk) 01:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

See User talk:Burkem#Please,_please_stop. --BrownHairedGirl 16:48, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd welcome your thoughts on User_talk:Burkem#Undoing_the_damage. --BrownHairedGirl 09:25, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't know where he is based, though I'm guessing the US, as the IPs beginning with 24.104 are completely consistent with his edits. It will take a Checkuser request to identify. However, unless he starts to edit anonymously, I don't think that is necessary. — ERcheck (talk) 22:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Arms/Supporters

No, or at least no in terms of my understanding. I'm talking about using the father's coat of arms *and* his supporters. That's certainly not possible in English or British law, except as I understand it when they themselves are summoned to parliament; sons can only use the coa with differencing. However I believe that the heir apparent to Scottish peerages have such extra rights with regard to supporters. Scottish rules generally are very generous in this area, you can get extra additions for being the nominated baron-baillie to a feudal scottish baron!!!

I'll buy that. - Kittybrewster 13:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

As to sloppy, Scottish matriculation is a modern (late c17) invention that would be (is?) a sham with regard to the original purpose - clear identification on the battlefield. It could only ever exist as it has in an age where they became matters of social display and amusement not function. Much as I love the idea of a scottish commander telling his troops: now listen here lads in the thick of battle you must kill the men with Argent, on a chevron between three haddock erect Gules, three haggis erect of the first or men with Argent, on a chevron between three herring erect Gules, three haggis erect of the first but for god's sake don't kill the man with Argent, on a chevron between three mackeral erect Gules, three haggis erect of the first he's on our side :-) Alci12 20:24, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

That made me laugh a lot. Thank you. - Kittybrewster 13:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

That's a relief humour can go wrong online :) Alci12 13:43, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

PMJI, but that is a true classic that deserves permanent archiving somewhere! Great job. Laura1822 14:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

As i'm passing I don't understand your use of 'Much Honoured the Viscount of Arbuthnott' on your website. While it's true that clan chiefs have used such forms the Rt Hon supersedes all lower forms. Alci12 13:11, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

It is archaic and amuses the present incumbent. - Kittybrewster 13:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Well I suppose he uses the 'of' so he's being consistent Alci12 13:43, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Stronges

Thanks very much, would be delighted too! --Couter-revolutionary 09:32, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I have added an e-mail address. Please do feel free to contact me. --Couter-revolutionary 22:31, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it seems to work correctly when sent through Misplaced Pages.--Couter-revolutionary 23:02, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, for me means "tentanda via est" "the way must be tried" (see and "dulce quod utile" "pleasant, because useful" (see . Greetings ~~ Phoe _talk 21:22, 12 November 2006 (UTC) ~~

I'm not sure I think 'pleasant' is meant there - 'sweet which useful' I assume it's supposed to be read as meaning something like (that which is) useful is sweet but I'm not certain Alci12

Could I, by any chance, join the 'Team Baronetcy' group? Thanks. --Couter-revolutionary 00:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Most welcome. - Kittybrewster 09:53, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Coat of Arms

Hi, have seen your comment on BrownHairedGirl's userpage. Renaming isn't possible here (or for admins here), since the coats of arms are inserted from Misplaced Pages Commons (any changes must done there). Greetings ~~ Phoe _talk 09:46, 15 November 2006 (UTC) ~~

Thank you. Of course it is merely a shield rather than a coat of arms. - Kittybrewster 09:47, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Aye, you know thus better. Best wishes. ~~ Phoe _talk 09:49, 15 November 2006 (UTC) ~~

How do I amend it on Misplaced Pages Commons? - Kittybrewster 09:51, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I think you can do this at , but is renaming really necessary? It is only the link, that was written wrongly - the text to the picture is added anyway in the article. By the way I would have let the shield at the articles of the individual viscounts, and the full (and big) coat of arms only at the article of the viscountcy. Greetings ~~ Phoe _talk 18:49, 15 November 2006 (UTC) ~~

Article

Territorial designation (which I wrote a while back) sort of covers that area. Not sure if that's what you're looking for. The "Lord X" vs "Lord X of Y" business could probably do with a mention on a more prominent peerage page, though. Proteus (Talk) 11:29, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Baronetcies are different because there's no question of whether something is or isn't part of the territorial designation, since a Baronetcy's TD is ostensibly simply a statement of where the new Baronet comes from rather than an indication of what his style will be. Proteus (Talk) 11:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Stronge_Baronets

I notice you've been adding the blazons (which I'm think is a really good thing) to various articles. However, I think we ought to put them in a form that can be read or googled for the answer. Using arg/gu makes it very difficult for people who don't know they are argent/silver and gules/red. I'll happily add that info back in.

However I'm a touch puzzled by the blazon in this example anyway. It's given as:

"1st and 4th arg., a chevron, undée sa., between three lozenges, arg., in the centre chief point, an estoile, gu. (for Stronge);"

So quarters 1 and 4 are tinctured silver/white with a wavy black chevron between 3 silver/white diamonds and in the chief point (top) a red star. Now I'm very tired but that seems like a metal on a metal? As the picture is b&w I can't tell if I'm just reading it wrong or the blazon isn't clear.

There are two crests/mottoes on that article presumably Stronge dexter and either Echlin or Manson sinister. Alci12 12:09, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

My wish is that every armiger should have a shield or arms or blazon. I prefer argent to silver in this context. I copied the blazon from (in this case) Burke's Peerage. I am sure I have come across metal on metal in English blazons before; but never in Scottish ones of course. - Kittybrewster 12:26, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Well you're not supposed to do it in English either - though I assume in this case it's probably white field and the diamonds are silver. As I say I'll try to fill the detail out where I'm sure what they mean - some abbreviations can sadly have two possibilities Alci12 12:37, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

According to the copy of Burke's I checked at lunchtime the lozenges are azure, not argent, which therefore doesn't violate the rule of tincture (the abbrevations are easy enough to confuse). You might be interested in the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Heraldry_and_vexillology#Blazon_Standard... about a preferred style of blazon. Dr pda 13:54, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

You're right - I miscopied it. The eagle is also in breach, is it not? - Kittybrewster 14:17, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Well good to hear that's settled. I've seen a few genuine examples that break the rules so I wasn't going to dig my heals in over this without access to the source to prove I was right. Alci12 17:46, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the eagle in the second quarter does break the rule of tincture. Dr pda 19:49, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Knights Bachelor

My artistic skills are far too meagre to change this into a color represenation and make it look halfway decent. Perhaps you can post a request on WP:HV for the colorization by some computer wiz.--Eva 15:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Political Compass

In your "about me" page, your external link to political compass is broken. There is now in internal link Political compass . Interesting concept. Thank you. === Vernon White (talk) 22:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Mary Frederica Elizabeth Mackenzie.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Mary Frederica Elizabeth Mackenzie.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Misplaced Pages:Image use policy
• Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 12:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Anthony Heward

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Anthony Heward, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Misplaced Pages:What Misplaced Pages is not and Misplaced Pages:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Misplaced Pages or discuss the relevant issues at Talk:Anthony Heward. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. ~ BigrTex 22:37, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Duff

That's a very good question. Reading the blazon before looking at the picture I was expecting to see a 2/1 split either side of the two lines. This would seem to be backed up by

Where you have other shapes ie a Saltire between four martlets Gules 1 martlet in is in each division. I will see what I can find to confirm that Alci12 11:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

re rename

Yes. Just click the "move" tab. "Move" is really "rename".

• Oh. Right. OK, I made the move. As for doing it yourself, I did find this: Help:Moving a page#Moving over a redirect which only works if the page was originally under Name A, was moved to Name B, and you want to move it back to Name A. Otherwise I guess only and admin can do it, yes. Herostratus 21:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Herald Boxes

Kitty. Thanks for adding the Heraldic Offices succession template. It just seems as though the "honorary titles" was not sufficient. Well done.--Eva 13:16, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Maitre d'Armes

In response to your question, no I didn't ask M. Bunel about the programme as I no longer needed it. If you would like a copy then I'd encourage you to ask him by all means, though! Regards, Abc1818 14:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

re Aussie vandal

I can't block him. It's coming from a shared IP address. Those can only be blocked for short periods to stop a vandalism in active progress. Sorry. Herostratus 21:34, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Baronet's Mother

I based that on a posting elsewhere that quoted from the Complete Baronetage (Cockaynes)

"The rank of the widow of a Baronet has been occasionally conferred, as was the case in the Baronetcy of Speelman, 9 Sep 1686, where the mother of the grantee was so honoured."

Now it's possible that this is wrong as the peerage sources don't always agree Alci12 12:28, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

It makes a difference in so far as she would be Lady Smith not Dame Betty Smith.Alci12 15:32, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

John Arbuthnot (disambiguation)

Hi, is there a reason, why do you want pipe these links? According to Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages)#Piping piping shall be avoided generally, however there exist also three exceptions. I quote:

1. Use piping if you are linking to an anchor point on the target page.

2. Use piping if the article title differs from what it should be due to technical limitations per {{Wrongtitle}}; for instance The Singles 81>85 or Softimage|XSI.

3. Use piping to format or quote a portion of an article whose name consists of both a title and a clarifier; for instance Harvey (film), USS Adder (SS-3), or "School" (song).

In your case, I think none of these three is given, so please would you revert your changes. Best wishes ~~ Phoe _talk 08:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC) ~~

Heya, I divide between guidelines and rules, and I would assign this to the latter. But I do not want argue with you, finally style is not important at all.

I have removed the TOC on my userpage, since it has made the page a little bit too messy. Tomorrow I will move the entries of the last month to the archive, so you will have a lot of space to write :-) ~~ Phoe _talk 20:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC) ~~

Aye, so much to do ... ~~ Phoe _talk 20:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC) ~~

Thanks for the creating. If I'm right, you don't know which Archibald Campbell is meant. In this case, perhaps I can give you an answer. In my opinion it is Sir Archibald Campbell, 1st Baronet, for three reasons:

• The commandment of the regiment changed in 1843, the year he died.
• From 1830 to 1847 the regiment was based in India, while he was made Commander-in-chief in Bombay in 1939 and returned to Edinburgh only shortly before his death.
• Ava is used as name by his grandson and further descendants, so it could be a reference to the 1st Baronet (perhaps the place of his house in Scotland?).

Greetings ~~ Phoe _talk 10:01, 5 December 2006 (UTC) ~~

stub pictures

Hi, I made 3 pictures of Ireland stub. Image:Ireland stub.svg, Image:Ireland stub2.svg and Image:Ireland stub3.svg. Hope it's what you expected. Next thumbs will be soon.--PaD cs:✉ 14:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Klippdass

Hi! I saw that you'd asked on another user's page about the Swedish word "klippdass" -- since I didn't see any response, I took the liberty of responding here.

"Klippdass" (plural "klippdassar") is the Swedish word for the Hyrax -- the word derives from Afrikaans I think. In any case it is a rather silly-looking (and silly-sounding) word to a Swede; I don't know if that is why Tove Jansson chose to call the little critters who chew on everything including people's noses "klippdassar" (In the English translations they are called "niblings", as you saw.)

So there are two distinct meanings of the word in Swedish. Bonadea 21:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Lauder Baronets

Thank you for leaving me a message. Could I direct you to the entry I have made for Sir John Lauder of Newington and Fountainhall, 1st baronet, where I have given sources. I cannot tell you what number it is but everything else is well recorded. Regards, David Lauder 10:13, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I have just done a major amount of work on the first baronet and given copious references. It has vanished and been replaced, apparently by you, with a minor entry. Can you explain this please. Am I wasting my time here? David Lauder 10:18, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

I just spent one and a half hours adding to the Lauder baronets article and it has vanished altogether without trace. Naturally I am very upset. I do not accept that Sir John Lauder was ever created a baronet of Idington. What is your reference here? David Lauder 10:25, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

The 8th Viscount's grave

Heho, I have downloaded a list of famous graves in Berlin, but he was'nt on it. Also I have searched for him in a database ], but haven't found something. So there are four possibilities. Either the location of his grave was forgotten in the course of the years, the grave was destroyed during the Second World War, the grave was removed because his "owner" wasn't important or he has died in Berlin, however, was not buried there. Greetings ~~ Phoe _talk 16:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC) ~~

Hi, i answered you over there on my german talk page. --Magadan ?! 10:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

No Idington (or Idlington?) baronetcy

There was never ever a Lauder of Idingtoun baronetcy. Sir John acquired the Idington estate, it is true. But both baronetcy patents were in the name 'of Fountainhall'. Where the confusion may arise with those less familiar with this family &c., is that the original patent had a special remainder to the eldest son of his third marriage, who was George Lauder, later designated 'of Idingtoun' (he had the Idingtoun estate settled upon him as it had originally belonged to his maternal grandfather). Indeed, the huge carry on over this baronetcy is well recorded, as George insisted that he was the rightful baronet and called himself Sir George Lauder of Idingtoun (which landed designation he had a right to), Baronet (which was cancelled), until he committed suicide in 1700. Indeed, the Retour of 1705 actually refers to him as Sir George Lauder. Regards. David Lauder 08:37, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I intend to delete these comments in a moment (and it is my talk page, so that is fine).

1. You obviously know the Lauder baronets which I do not
2. I know chirnside, edrington, longformachus, duns, whiteadder water, wedderburn, etc
3. your remark about who created sir john lauder is true but it makes you look less well than you might; I recommend you delete it in its entirety. It is the computer program which states who started what and whatt I should have done is move lauder baronets to sir john lauder and thenn replace the resulting redirect with new stuff. My fault. Dinna fash yersel' over it.
4. my typos are the result of shakes, tremor and parkinson's
5. your remark above is very constructive and should be under Lauder baronets
6. my source for any disagreement will be rayment or SCB's Official Roll

Kittybrewster 09:01, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Please be assured that I mean no disrespect whatsoever. I apologise if my manner appears otherwise. I will try and watch that in future. If you can lay your hands on a copy of The Grange of St.Giles the full story of the baronetcy dispute is there. David Lauder 10:59, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

"A question of credit where credit is due". Interesting. Not where I am coming from at all. I am not fussed about whether I get credit for things. I am happy to send you a few new articles and you can upload them under your "flag". I remain of the view that your existing protestation makes you look less well than you might. - Kittybrewster 14:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Copy & paste

Hi Kittybrewster, a little information for you. Copy and paste moves, how you have done here , are generally a bad idea. I know your reason, you have tried to restore the wrong move of User:Icairns - but this led to the result, that Sir Francis Burdett, 5th Baronet and Francis Burdett, 5th Baronet are identical articles with different histories. Please use in such cases in future Misplaced Pages:Moves#Uncontroversial moves. Thanks for your effort. ~~ Phoe _talk 09:27, 8 December 2006 (UTC) ~~

Baronet picture

Hi,

I wanted to thank you for uploaded the photo Image:BaronetUK.jpg. I suggest that instead you upload it to the wikipedia commons at commons.wikimedia.org. It is just like uploading to wikipedia, and this way it can be used in all the wikipedia projects easily. When you upload it just put it in a category like Category:British honours system. Great job, thanks Dowew 11:04, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Somebody else has uploaded it. - Kittybrewster 14:41, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Awesome, I have added it to Category:British honours system Dowew 21:01, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Stronges.

Thank you for adding the coat of arms, it looks very well. --Couter-revolutionary 16:15, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Baronets

Am I not right in saying that the correct term is knight-baronet? On the Baronets page I think they are confusing the early period, when they say baronets were made during the reigns of the Edwards, with Knight-Bannerets. What is your view here?

I have looked in "The Baronetage" by Sir Martin Lindsay of Dowhill Bt and find that he uses the term baronet rather than knight-baronet. Quote <<...1321, mentioned that baronets took part, along with barons and knights. Edward III is known to have created eight Baronets in 1328>>.

Also, I see you have described the Fountainhall Arms. But are they not the quartered Arms of the Dick Lauder family in general? I seem to recall many of the 19th century directories always carried the Arms of Lauder of Fountainhall only against the baronetcy entry. But I cannot remember whether they were those of the 1st or 2nd Bt (presumably they should be the 1st?). What is the correct position here? (I could check as I know Sir Malcolm Innes but I thought you might know). David Lauder 18:10, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

My source was Burke's Peerage 105th edition. Armorial achievements (coats of arms) belong to one individual rather than to a family in general. - Kittybrewster 18:36, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Bruges burial

Hmm, I'm not altogether sure. Do you know where he exactly was buried? If not, the local tourist services(toerisme@brugge.be) or the Catholic church (topa.westvl@kerknet.be is probably your best bet) might know. I'm not from around there, but that's who I'd contact first. :)

Additionally, the local branch of the National Archive might be able to help out too: Rijksarchief.Brugge@arch.be They're usually quite willing to help, and should be able to tell you if they have anything in their archives which involves this person you're looking for...

All the best, Random Nonsense 22:12, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Lords Maitland/Thirlestane

You've made a light error in changing Lord Maitland to Lord Thirlestane. He was created Lord Maitland of Thirlestane. It is easy to get that confused with the 1624 subsidiary creation of Lord Thirlestane. John Maitland, 1st Lord Maitland of Thirlestane, was dead then. David Lauder 10:52, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh dear. Whoops. Correction time again. - Kittybrewster 13:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

The clan site gets the title wrong as well - even though it's clearly approved by the chief. Alci12 14:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

419eater.com

This looks right up your street! Happy Christmas from Major Bonkers.

List of Ambassadors from the United Kingdom to Italy

Heho, sorry, but I found nothing confirming that Sir Augustus Berkeley Paget was ambassador already in 1867, against this all my sources state only the time from 1876 to 1883. Perhaps User:Craigy144 can give you an answer about this. Greetings ~~ Phoe _talk 09:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC) ~~

I am confident he was; my source is fco.gov.uk Kittybrewster 10:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Pardon my interrupting, this page came up on my watch list. A bit of digging reveals the notice of his appointment in The London Gazette, 9 July 1867. In 1876 the Legation was raised to the status of an Embassy (The Times, Wednesday, Mar 22, 1876; pg. 7), and Paget was promoted from Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to the King of Italy to Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the King of Italy (The London Gazette, 21 April 1876). I note that for the initial appointment he was based in Florence (the capital until 1870), but at some point in the early 1870's (possibly with the change to Embassy status) the mission officially moved to Rome. Dr pda 14:24, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

You're more than welcome, well done and thank you. I have added it on List of Ambassadors from the United Kingdom to Italy talk page. - Kittybrewster 00:21, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Baron Rennell (of Rodd)

Not according to burkes no. Alci12 13:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. "of Rodd in the County of Hereford" is the territorial designation. Proteus (Talk) 15:03, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it was meant Baron Rennell, of Rodd in the County of Hereford - what the National Portrait Gallery, the Peerage, The National Archives Rayment and various other sources confirm. ~~ Phoe _talk 16:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC) ~~

Yes; to clarify, I was saying "indeed" to Alci's comment (which I assumed was "no" to the question "is his title Baron Rennell of Rodd?"). I need to be more clear, it would seem. The title's definitely only "Baron Rennell". Proteus (Talk) 16:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh dear. FCO told me he was Lord Rennell of Rodd; Rennnell was his given name, Rodd his surname. Seems odd. - Kittybrewster 17:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Heirs male

While there are variables that could invalidate this I would read heir male (without 'of the body') as any (legitimate) male heir of the grantee. ie also of any male ancestor of the grantee. It would not decend through a female heir to a male heir. Alci12 21:06, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Isn't the term for that (the inclusion of heirs male of male ancestors of the grantee) "heirs male whatsoever"? Choess 06:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

In Scottish peerage law yes, though this question was a matter of property transmission and as I wasn't specifically asked about Scotland I gave a UK answer. Your male heir could be a brother, uncle or cousin in property. The law assumed baring an entail to such heirs male that it would go (absent sons) to the daughters jointly.

As for peerages outside scotland heirs male whatsoever essentially doesn't exist. There are a handful of patents (Proteus is it seven?) where it should read sibi et heredibus suis masculis de suo corpore in perpetuum but omits the key section. This is just heirs male but has the same meaning as the Scottish male heir whatsoever ie that it goes back via patrilinial male heirs. Alci12 13:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Move request

Kittybrewster. To make sure I understand your request. Currently the main page article has name "A", while name "B" redirects to the "A" page. Please let me know if this is what you want:

1. You would like to have the article exist at "B", rather than have "B" as the redirect. (In otherwords, delete B, move A to B.)
2. Would you like A to then redirect to B?

Is this a controversial move? — ERcheck (talk) 22:46, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused here. Today you moved B to A; you are just asking it to be undone? I'm happy to do it, just need to make sure I don't mess it up. — ERcheck (talk) 22:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

FYI. I'll be offline for about 1-1/2 hours. I'll check back and make the move then. — ERcheck (talk) 23:02, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Looks like User:Proteus already took care of it. Sorry for the delay on my part. Do feel free to ask again if something comes up that I can help with. — ERcheck (talk) 00:32, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Rockin Thru the Rye

Hi. I notice that you had wikilinked the Bill Haley song Rockin' Thru the Rye. It's a redlink at the moment. Does this mean you'll be creating an article for it? (Just keeping track of Haley-related articles that might be appearing). Cheers! 23skidoo 15:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Doddington Park, Nantwich

I'll se what I can do, I may take a few days as I'm not home from Uni yet and am then going up to Scotland for a week.

But if it's still to be done after that, I'll do it quite happily.

Mothball 22:10, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Kittybrewster, I'd like to and when I'm next in the area I will, if it's still necessary. The problem is it's nearly thirty miles away from me and I'm not lucky enough to own a car (as you can see the location's fairly isolated) so it might be a long time before I have the opportunity. Sorry I can't be more helpful - do feel free to ask again if there are any more locations (Cheshire, Manchester, Liverpool, Cambridgeshire but I'd rather not give away my location) although obviously I can't make promises. Best wishes. --Lo2u 00:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Baron of Fulwood, Baron of Dirleton

I note your AFD you may be intered in the other article held by the same person and likewise lacking any obvious notability or citations. Alci12 18:15, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

In the meantime the missing parts were inserted. You have forgotten to use the right format (step III at Misplaced Pages:AFD, so the nominations did not appear automatically at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Log/2006 December 18. There are logs for every day helping admins to control which nominations have to be closed, finished or stopped. It could therefore have been that the nominations would have obtained a result, but no consequence. ~~ Phoe _talk 20:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC) ~~

Thanks for the invitation to vote, but since I hate deleting and the articles may contain at least a little correct information (in addition, they are labelled as not being hereditary), it is better, I think, to be neutral. Best wishes and Merry Christmas to you. ~~ Phoe _talk 11:46, 24 December 2006 (UTC) ~~

Robert Murray Arbuthnot

A tag has been placed on Robert Murray Arbuthnot, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Misplaced Pages. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. SpLoT _(*C*+u+g) 10:41, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

PaulM

Well I have to laugh I was just posting on that thread when I had an edit conflict with your last post and quit out of to find your pm about the thread:) Alci12 16:54, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Christmas

Please do have a very Holy and Happy Christmas. David Lauder 17:42, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Tolbooths

Could I draw your attention to the description of a Scottish Tolbooth. Someone has listed them as prisons! But in fact tolbooths in most burghs were where the ancient councils met and where the baillies heard their cases. Under many, usually at basement level, were cells, yes, but that was not the absolute purpose of a Scottish Tolbooth. I wonder if some sort of clarification or redirection could be made under the Tolbooth heading? David Lauder 17:55, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Doddington Park

There is a page on the details at Misplaced Pages:Requesting copyright permission and some more specfic information at Misplaced Pages:Donating_copyrighted_materials#Granting_us_permission_to_copy_material_already_on_line. Note that it is not enough for the the copyright holder to simply give permission for Misplaced Pages to use their work, they must license it under the GFDL or a compatible free licence.

For such a short article though it may be a lot easier to just rewrite it. Reusing the same facts but just using completely different prose.

I notice you added a note on the talk page claiming that the article was created by webmasterATdoddingtonpark.com, as the article was created by you am I right in assuming you are the webmaster of doddingtonpark.com. In which case if you adding a note somewhere on doddingtonpark.com stating that it's content is licensed under the GFDL or a compatible license is one way of granting Misplaced Pages permission.  YDAM TALK 20:26, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Sir_Currimbhoy_Ebrahim,_1st_Baronet

Happy Xmas & etc. I read your edits (Currimbhoy Ebrahim was an Indian Muslim, created a baronet in 1911 by the Currimbhoy Ebrahim Baronetcy Act) but I'm dubious about the implication of the wording. He was created a baronet in the normal way (1910), but the act in council (of 1911) seems to have been to create a trust to support the dignity vide The same is presumably true of the Cowasji Jehangir Baronetcy Act though I have not checked.Alci12 17:03, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

No, my only contribution was to add the words ", 1st Baronet" to the name of the article. Or to put it another way, I moved it to conform with MoS. - Kittybrewster 21:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah sorry then I must have looked too quickly :/ Alci12 21:36, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Paul McCartney & MBE

Alright then, its as posh as most folks will ever get - the others are a bit exclusive, kno'worra'mean?. If you want to put Dr pda's suggestions into the text please do (although I might want Andreasedge to do it - since he has already done so much). Thanks for the help.LessHeard vanU 20:32, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Pastorwayne

I left a comment on User:Pastorwayne and his rapid category creation at WP:ANI. The comment asks for Pastorwayne to be regulated regarding category creation. Feel free to comment. Dr. Submillimeter 22:33, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Pastorwayne is now creating categories using a different method. Check his 3 January 2007 edits to Beverly Waugh. He has recreated Category:Christian editors using a method described in WP:CAT, which describes adding a category as a red link to an article before creating the category itself. Moreover, since this category was renamed on 2006 December 8, the recreation of this category is disruptive editing. Dr. Submillimeter 15:45, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

ProveIt removed the red linked category, but it does look like Pastorwayne was attempting to recreate the category. Dr. Submillimeter 15:51, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

According to ProveIt, Pastorwayne has been doing this in multiple articles on 3 January 2007. I have added comments to WP:ANI. Dr. Submillimeter 16:07, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Your first baronet

I see I have made a connection with your family on the Basil Hall page. David Lauder 15:41, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Well done - and thank you. I have learned someething new. - Kittybrewster 17:18, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Religious editor categories

I am going to propose a rename for Category:Editors of Christian works to Category:Editors of Christian publications. Presumably, Category:Editors of religious publications could contain the editors of the publications of other religions (Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.). Dr. Submillimeter 09:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I would oppose. Why should Christian editors be singled out? - Kittybrewster 11:04, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

John Pringle

Is he the 1st baronet? He was the ONLY baronet of that creation. Surely numbering only commences when there is more than one? David Lauder 15:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Charles George Arbuthnot

Hi, maybe you can help me. I'm wondering whether Charles George Arbuthnot, the son of John Alves Arbuthnot (not the General Charles George Arbuthnot), is notable enough to create an article on him. I know he was director of the Bank of England and Lieutenant of the City of London, but this is a bit too little. I have searched in the net, however but everything what I have found was over the general. So perhaps do you have some facts on him - or isn't he notable anyway? Thanks and by the way have a happy and healthy new year. ~~ Phoe _talk 23:50, 4 January 2007 (UTC) ~~

My knowledge of him is as yours. And he was educated Eton College and a director of Arbuthnot Latham & Co. - Kittybrewster 00:04, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Aye, then I fear he isn't notable enough. I will look after the professors. Greetings ~~ Phoe _talk 17:11, 5 January 2007 (UTC) ~~

I am thinking we need an aticle on Charles Arbuthnot, Abbot of Ratisbon. - Kittybrewster 17:47, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I have expanded the article a little bit, basing on a German webpage. He cannot be born in 1757, since he was then too young to have been appointed abbot in 1776 - so 1737 seems to be correct (except for month and day). Furthermore I would suggest you to move the article to Benedict Arbuthnot, it was his name in the order and as such for the largest portion of his life. Greetings ~~ Phoe _talk 19:25, 6 January 2007 (UTC) ~~

Edits to Category:Canadian immigrants to the United States

While your edits to Category:Canadian immigrants to the United States (effectively turning it into a redirect) were well-intentioned, they broke the category. Articles placed in Category:Canadian immigrants to the United States did not appear in Category:Canadian immigrants to America when the redirect was in place. I had to undo the redirect. Also, you may want to be careful doing such things while discussions on the categories are continuing at WP:CFD. Some people may take offense.

I will be re-proposing to merge Category:Canadian immigrants to America into Category:Canadian immigrants to the United States once the old discussion is closed. Dr. Submillimeter 21:47, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

John_Fisher,_1st_Baron_Fisher

It's not important but I do remember looking briefly a long while back to see if I could find where the above gained his Arbuthnot name as I couln't find a quick family link. Alci12 12:12, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

middle name No 12. - Kittybrewster 12:27, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I looked at the famous arbuthnot's secion of your site but didn't notice the middle name section. Alci12 12:33, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Arbuthnot Road article

Hi there, I noticed that you created the Arbuthnot Road article by way of the WikiProject Hong Kong Talk Page. I don't mind helping other editors in building better articles. However, I have doubts as to whether this page meets Misplaced Pages criteria for notability and thus may be an AfD candidate. Note, that a quick Google search yields little notability. Let me know what you think. Luke! 21:55, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Replied on your page. - Kittybrewster 22:18, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: John Arbuthnott, 16th Viscount of Arbuthnott

No, the post-nominals are only used within the Order (correspondence etc.) and not alongside others. Regards, Craigy (talk) 21:30, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

It's GCStJ (Burke's lists Arbuthnott incorrectly). Craigy (talk) 21:41, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs

Thanks for the split and by the way if you have not seen it yet . Greetings ~~ Phoe _talk 15:07, 12 January 2007 (UTC) ~~

Andrew H. A. Murray

That's a stumper. I've made a cull of London Gazettes, with the following results, reproducing the style just as written:

• 1 January 1946: O.B.E. conferred upon Andrew Hunter Arbuthnot Murray, Esq., J.P.
• 1 January 1949: A knighthood to be conferred upon Andrew Hunter Arbuthnot Murray, Esq., O.B.E., J.P., Lord Provost of Edinburgh
• 4 March 1949: The honour of knighthood conferred on 25 February 1949 upon Andrew Hunter Arbuthnot Murray, Esq., O.B.E.
• 24 June 1949: The Rt. Hon. Sir Andrew Hunter Arbuthnot Murray, O.B.E. made a Commander of the Order of St. John.
• 20 January 1953: Sir Andrew Hunter Arbuthnot Murray, Kt., O.B.E. to be Deputy Lieutenant of Edinburgh.

According to Mayors in the United Kingdom#The Right Honourable, it's attached to the Lord Provostship, although it's interesting that it didn't appear until after his knighting. Choess 18:17, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Ronald Knox

Hi there, just doing some fact-checking, and I wondered what source you were using for the middle name of "Hilary" in Ronald Knox: ? I'm sure you're right, but I was curious because it wasn't mentioned in Penelope Fitzgerald's biography. — Matt Crypto 12:25, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

These - Kittybrewster 12:27, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Could it perhaps be a pen-name or some other pseudonym, rather than a given name? Some of those links give Hilary in brackets, which is one way of denoting such, rather than a given name. In her book, Fitzgerald lists the middle names of the Knox brothers, and actually discusses the reasons for them -- it would be quite anomalous if she'd missed one out. Other more formal sources omit it, like Who's Who in Christianity from Routledge. I think we need a reliable source on this one. — Matt Crypto 12:40, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Whiteadder

I think that I've fixed it. Please check to see whether my IPA is correct. I've always known and heard the names pronounced "Quhitta-dar", and "Blāk-adar". Cheers. Brendandh 14:56, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Regarding the article Ash (near Sandwich) - you have edited, have you got any green idea about the origin of the name?

Eliko 00:01, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Assassination

Yes, that's my point. Thanks. --Couter-revolutionary 00:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Missionary categories

Hi, I would welcome your thoughts at Category talk:Missionaries#Restructuring_and_cleanup. (I am notifying several people who have participated in recent related CFDs)--BrownHairedGirl 11:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Arbuthnot button.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Arbuthnot button.jpg. Misplaced Pages gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Misplaced Pages, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Misplaced Pages:Image use policy
• Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 09:05, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Button

Looks like an impalement of a wife's arms at marriage to the chief of the arbuthnot arms. I'd check the names for marriages. Googling quickly on my assumed blazon gives a few families with the same arms (without the chief & roundels) like Brown of Balquham and keninmonth of craghal. The chief roundels could be a matriculation from any of such arms. Alci12 13:56, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

arbuthnot is sinister? - You asked for a description of the arms on the right of the button which is the sinister heraldically ie the unknown arms. Alci12 12:20, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

IF you still have no joy you could post on rec heraldry as one of the Scottish members might have someone who would recognise the arms.Alci12 10:24, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Good evening, Kittybrewster.

I saw a question you asked Orror on his user talk page. I am afraid he is currently unavailable (his last remark, a month ago, could be translated by leaving announcement, not for long I hope). I will awkwardly replace him here, before he can give you a better answer.

1. The sinister side of your button seems to be a chevron between three fleur-de-lis (or roses), on a chief three roundels. Unfortunately, the colors are unknown. Perhaps a chief azure (horizontal lines), the roundels or (points) — also known as bezants —, and the chevron gules (vertical lines), but it is very difficult to say positively. I have no idea of the family, probably allied with the Arbuthnots.
2. To post a request for a shield on the French wikipedia, you can use the page Shield requests. But its readers are mainly French-speaking readers, of course. If you do not speak French yourself, you can post it on my own talk page; I will try to translate it before submitting it on the project page. To keep you waiting for the return of Orror...

Regards, Bruno Vallette 21:19, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Sir Charles Stronge, 7th Baronet

Sir Charles Stronge, 7th Baronet, the chap user:vintagekits has put this up for speedy-deletion, I think it satisfies requirements, could you help. Thanks, best wishes --Couter-revolutionary 19:10, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I would support User Couter-revolutionary in this. David Lauder 15:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

re: Category:Date of birth missing

Good afternoon. Per the discussion about privacy concerns expressed at Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons#Privacy of birthdays, date of birth should generally not be added to the biographies of living non-public or semi-public figures. So far, that policy has been interpreted fairly strictly with a pretty high bar being set for the definition of "public figures" who are assumed to have given up their rights to privacy.

By the same token, we should not be adding Category:Date of birth missing to articles unless we have made the case that the person meets the "public figures" threshold. Otherwise, we're just baiting new users into adding content even though the community has already said that we shouldn't include that particular data point. Category:Year of birth missing is okay but the exact date is often not. Thanks for your help. Rossami (talk) 20:28, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to WP:N

I have reverted the change you made to the notability guidelines, as I do not feel there is consensus for this change. I have posted the removed text on the discussion page instead so that it may be discussed. Please comment if you would like! Also, please note that only very minor changes (such as uncontroversial corrections to spelling, grammar, or formatting) should be marked as minor edits. Thanks! Seraphimblade 07:46, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Dates of birth

Those people in the very many directories extant, such as Burkes, Debretts, Who's Who, Kellys, Whittakers, Who's Who in Scotland, Dods, etc., all carry the dates of birth for living people/people in the public domain. Therefore it seems slightly silly to be making a stand on this point. David Lauder 16:07, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree. - Kittybrewster 16:38, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Somerset Arthur Maxwell

See Talk:Somerset Arthur Maxwell#Family. Do you have any sources which might help? --BrownHairedGirl 17:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Diarmuid O'Neill

You may be interested in this AFD- yet another non notable IRA member. Astrotrain 22:27, 29 January 2007 (UTC)