Jump to content

Talk:Victor Cavendish, 9th Duke of Devonshire

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Aides-de-camp

[edit]

How could this sentence be reworded? "For Cavendish, Canada left with his family the two aides-de-camp who had married Cavendish's daughters while the family resided in Ottawa." It's not making sense at the moment. There were three daughters. Harold Macmillan was his aide-de-camp, who else?--User:Brenont (talk) 15:03, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Awkward phrasing

[edit]

The phrase "Governorship general" is not common usage. I'll happily change Governor-Generals to Governors-General, but this does not extend to making up odd constructions such as Governordom-general or Governorship-general. They jar the reader's eye. Far better to find a different construction that provides the same information without making people wince. Saying that the same awkward phrase has been used elsewhere and we should therefore be consistent in our awkwardness cuts no ice. Are you really going to edit war over such nonsense? I'm going to hunt down all the other instances of this horrible bit of faux-English and stomp them to death, and if you want to make a fuss over it, be my guest. --Pete (talk) 21:03, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Already under discussion at Talk:David Johnston#Perhaps discussion to avoid an edit war would be appropriate. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 21:31, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, noted, unimpressed. No consensus there for "clunky phrasing" only you support. --Pete (talk) 21:48, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Honours - Dates Wanted

[edit]

Based on research in "Kelly's Handbook to the Titled, Landed and Official Classes" for 1920 (entry on page 498) I have established 1916 as the year he was made KG but cannot find exact day and month for the award. From checking in the Kelly's Handbook for 1925, page 497, he was by that year awarded the Territorial Decoration (TD) and the "Burke's Peerage" volume for 1923 states he was a Knight of Justice of the Order of St John of Jerusalem. I would happily bring these into the article if precise year of the latter two awards could be sourced.Cloptonson (talk) 13:05, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

KG, 1 January 1916: "No. 29423". The London Gazette (Supplement). 1 January 1916.
KGStJ, 15 August 1916: "No. 29711". The London Gazette. 18 August 1916.
KJStJ, 26 November 1917: "No. 30402". The London Gazette. 27 November 1917.
TD, 6 March 1923: "No. 32803". The London Gazette. 6 March 1923.
Opera hat (talk) 16:35, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I have incorporated them into the article under Honours.Cloptonson (talk) 19:42, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

End of service in Derbyshire Yeomanry

[edit]

I noticed a citation need had been put against my statement he retired from the Yeomanry in 1911. I have added my source, which gave the year as 1911, without describing how the service finished, as the 1913 Kelly's Handbook. His entry in Burke's Peerage for the same year states "late Derbyshire Yeomanry", implying he had ceased to serve with the regiment. Had he remained serving with the regiment the following year he would probably have been mobilized to serve in World War I, which for him did not happen.Cloptonson (talk) 19:16, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clarity

[edit]

To lump together his early life, his education, his family and his political career into one section is confusing - that is why I changed it. *I* was not the slightest bit interested in his political career; I wanted to know about his family. Those four topics are quite separate, and deserve a separate paragraph each. His political career was "what he did", while the other three are to a greater extent "what happened to him", and it is therefore right to separate them.

As for his children, I concede a numbered list is more appropriate than a bulleted list; but to run them all on (with their subordinate details) as continuous text is very confusing.

The principal aim of any article should be clarity and ease of assimilation. Extra lines, short paragraphs, cost nothing and aid clarity.

I would not have changed it had I not found it confusing. RobinClay (talk) 23:52, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's not "lumped into one", it's in different paragraphs under one heading. I fail to see how that's confusing. Sections shouldn't be too short and I think we end up with two too short sections when splitting the "Early life, family, and political career" one in half. But, I guess it's tolerable.
We are discouraged from using bulleted (and, in the same vein, numbered) lists unless helpful in breaking up large masses of text, which isn't the case here, and a list is not required to mention his children; prose form reads just fine. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 18:32, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The MOS to which you refer makes no mention of numbered lists. For a few children, text may be OK, but for seven, run-on text gets confusing, and you actually have to go through them all, counting, to see which one is which. Prose form may "read just fine" for you, but you are not "everyone". I said, *I* found it confusing, and therefore more clarity is needed. That, surely, is unarguable. Why do you deliberately want to make it more confusing and less clear ??? RobinClay (talk) 22:04, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say the MOS mentioned numbered lists specifically. I said it mentions bulleted lists and it's within the spirit of the guideline to include numbered lists. You're the only person ever to say the way Cavendish's children are mentioned is confusing. It's perfectly clear as it is. You'll note it's the same way Queen Victoria's children are presented in her biography page. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 14:32, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Victor Cavendish, 9th Duke of Devonshire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:01, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Victor Cavendish, 9th Duke of Devonshire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:07, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Victor_Cavendish,_9th_Duke_of_Devonshire&oldid=1236306074"