User talk:AllsoulsDay

Earl of Selkirk

I think I'd turn that situation on its head and say there can never be a heir apparent to the Selkirk secundogeniture. The inability of heirs apparent to be displaced is definitional. Since the Hamilton line can always fail and force the Dukedom to devolve on an Earl of Selkirk, and since younger sons can always move "up" in the rankings by the death of elder sons, heirs to the Earldom are always heirs presumptive. Choess (talk) 01:34, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Royal Dukedoms

Hiya.. if you feel there's a problem with the article, please go ahead and fix it! I don't own it. [ roux ] [x] 11:43, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Hervey de Stanton

I can give you a lot off book-related cites, but little on teh interwebs. Ironholds (talk) 18:15, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

De La Warr

I confess I thought my edits fairly unexceptional. The articles I've seen on nobility usually describe them as "British nobility" or "British peers" rather than "parliamentarians," it being an enthymeme, as it were, that pre-'99 E/GB/UK peers were entitled to a seat in the Lords. If you'd really like to change it back, I won't stop you, but I don't think it's in keeping with the way Wikipedia usually describes peers—had I realized it would be controversial, I certainly would have brought it up on the talk page first. Choess (talk) 00:34, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Earl

Thanks very much, very interesting indeed! :) Best, --Cameron* 12:25, 9 November 2008 (UTC)