Talk:Thomas Pelham-Holles, 1st Duke of Newcastle-upon-Tyne
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It is unnecessarily pedantic to insist on "Duke of Newcastle-upon-Tyne" in the article title. The guy is always called simply "the Duke of Newcastle" (as also everybody else who has ever been Duke of Newcastle). The only reason "upon Tyne" is ever included is to distinguish this guy's two dukedoms of Newcastle. The guy is called "Duke of Newcastle" and we should use that as the title of the article. john k 22:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- I think Wikipedia:WikiProject Peerage would disagree with you here; it only seems logical that if you put a peer at a title, he should be at the actual title, even if it's not what he's usually called. TysK 05:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
- The full title is often incredibly long and complicated. Thomas Pelham-Holles, 1st Duke of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, in the county of Northumberland, and 1st Duke of Newcastle-under-Lyme, in the county of Stafford would be the full title. And it's absurd. There's absolutely no reason to include "upon-Tyne" in the article title. john k 01:19, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Consistency about the "Two Days" & "Four Days" Prime Ministers
Please see Talk:List of Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom#The Two Days & Four Days Prime Ministers for discussion about consistency on how to handle the events of February 1746 and June 1757 on the various lists on ministers and ministries. Timrollpickering 22:43, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

