Talk:Gough-Calthorpe family

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the West Midlands WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the West Midlands. In so doing it works and collaborates with the two related projects UK Geography WikiProject and UK Subdivisions WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Please also feel free to join in the discussions on the project's talk page.
	An editor has requested that an image be added to this article. Please try to add a suitable image. Once the requested image is added, remove the imageneeded template call on this page to remove this image request.
Start	This page has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

[edit] Gough-Calthorpe family

I have deleted the unnecessary information that Gough-Calthorpe is a 'double-barrelled' surname, which is self-evident (but is also a slang expression) and the location of the family papers, which have no place in this article. – Agendum 10:47, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

On what basis do you claim that the location of the family papers have "no place" in an article about, er, the family? Andy Mabbett 09:15, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The usual Wikipedia style in biographies does not find it necessary to identify the location of family papers. – Agendum 10:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

That's no reason not to do so here. Andy Mabbett 10:06, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I've restored them yet again. Please desist. Andy Mabbett 06:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Arthur Gough-Calthorpe

Andy – do you happen to know which member of the family was elected as M.P. for Bramber in 1825, after William Wilberforce? I have it as Arthur Gough-Calthorpe, but can find no reference to him anywhere, apart from in a listing of former Members of Parliament. The first name may be an error, in which case, I guess either George or Frederick would be likely contenders. – Agendum 10:08, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, no. Andy Mabbett 06:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)