Talk:Baron Carrickfergus

Untitled

Please merge. Baron Carrickfergus is the official term, without "of".

Merge

I can see where people are coming from but I don't think a merge is the best course of action. The reason I say that is because the current page here is compleatly unsourced whereas the other one (which I created) is. I think that maybe the best course of action is maybe blank this page and move the contents of the other page to this one. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 08:35, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Also might I request that no action be taken until the wedding is over as I for one like many will be watching it and you won't get as wide a view from others if you do anything before or during it. I would think it would be best if we wait until after 1.30PM BST before doing anything. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 08:39, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Support - Yours is far better written.--[[User: Duffy2032|Duffy2032]] (talk) 08:46, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I have tagged this article for deletion, so a proper move of the other one can be performed. I'm not clear why you (C of E) think making the move now would affect page views. One article will be a redirect to the other, so people will be able to find it regardless. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 08:47, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Keep this one, redirect the other

Pretty simple really. The title is Baron Carrickfergus not Baron of Carrickfergus. From the Queen's Official Website http://www.royal.gov.uk/LatestNewsandDiary/Pressreleases/2011/Announcementoftitles29April2011.aspx This is the single, only correct course of action. The text from the two should be merged, but what the correct title is pretty unambiguous. Jaxsonjo (talk) 08:54, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Agreed, this is the way to go. --coldacid (talk|contrib) 09:02, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

There is nothing to be saved from the text here, therefore it's easiest to delete this one and move the other into the space provided. Or is that what you're suggesting? Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 09:03, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

There is minimal text that can be added to the Baron of Carrickfergus page. Simply select the best from both and retitle it Baron Carrickfergus, redirect the other. Indeed there is even a case to redirect both to the Prince William, Duke of Cambridge page Jaxsonjo (talk) 10:17, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Picture caption.

Whatever the fate of the page(s) if the picture is retained anywhere the caption should be reconsidered. "second Baron Carrickfergus" in British usage normally indicates the inheritor of the title from a first Baron which is not the case.

It might be best to eliminate the "second" entirely in a caption. But if the intent was to refer to this being the second creation of the barony the (pedantically) correct means would be "Baron Carrickfergus of the second creation".

Calmeilles (talk) 10:56, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I think the picture should be retained especially since I've included it in a DYK entry for this page. But you do have a point it's a recreation not an inheritance so I suppose just Baron Carrickfergus or 1st Baron Carrickfergus should be used as we do have a history of the previous holder. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 12:13, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

tradition

traditionally Princes get three titles, a dukedom, earldom, and barony, and one from each of the constituent kingdoms. 98.206.155.53 (talk) 13:56, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I notice the Prince of Wales is Earl of Carrick, but that's in Scotland - although it may have some connection through the medieval invasion of Ireland from Scotland. Just wondering why the Carrickfergus baronetcy in particular was revived. Shtove 19:09, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

focus

I believe this article to be more about a list of the the married royal couple's new appointed titles instead of about Baron Carrickfergus alone. Why even mention Kate? see Duke of Windsor or Duke of York for examples—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.200.225.125 (talk) 13:18, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Baron Carrickfergus. 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:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.carrickfergustimes.co.uk/news/local-news/letter-of-thanks-from-royal-couple-1-5478729
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100523041923/http://www.cracroftspeerage.co.uk:80/online/content/index355.htm to http://www.cracroftspeerage.co.uk/online/content/index355.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 13:08, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Baron Carrickfergus. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cracroftspeerage.co.uk/online/content/index355.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110430091158/http://www.officialroyalwedding2011.org/blog/2011/April/29/Titles-announced-for-Prince-William-and-Catherine-Middleton to http://www.officialroyalwedding2011.org/blog/2011/April/29/Titles-announced-for-Prince-William-and-Catherine-Middleton

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) 04:03, 15 July 2017 (UTC)