User talk:Edward Jocob Philip Smith

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

Images in infoboxes[edit]

Thank you for all your contributions! Please also note when adding images to infobox, you don't need the filename, not the whole File: template, as per WP:IBI. Thanks. -Kj cheetham (talk) 13:13, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain the rationale for your edits to the above page? Wikipedia policies on names are fairly clear, to quote MOS:SURNAME:

'A member of the nobility may be referred to by title if that form of address would have been the customary way to refer to him or her; for example Robert Dudley, 1st Earl of Leicester, may become the Earl of Leicester, the Earl, or just Leicester (if the context is clear enough) in subsequent mentions. For modern-day nobility it is better to use name and title...'

When in list form as the edits you changed were, this would seem to suggest that using 'The Earl of' is inappropriate as it is too vague. Additionally piping the link to 'The Earl of' violates WP:NOPIPE. Is there a consensus on using 'The Earl of' in tables and lists? If not the lists should be left as they were. Ecrm87 (talk) 21:51, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but if you look at any other wikipedia page it is styled simply "title" and you only require basic knowledge to distinguish peers in government. Edward Jocob Philip Smith (talk) 10:21, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Any other wikipedia page, such as? Please define 'it', given that what you're saying flies in the face of all the cited guidelines. I would also say that you're making a pretty massive leap by saying basic knowledge is needed to distinguish peers. For example you might have a father and son holding the same office separated by a couple of decades, based on what you're saying they would both be labelled 'The Earl of Yarmouth' (for example) with nothing to distinguish them. That argument also isn't supported under MOS:SURNAME, which mandates full name at first usage. I have not been able to find anything in Wikipedia policies on lists to the contrary. Ecrm87 (talk) 11:14, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
William Ewart Gladstone, Archibald Primrose, 5th Earl of Rosebery, Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury can't be asked to put more Edward Jocob Philip Smith (talk) 13:45, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure whether any of those articles fit wikipedia policies, but have created a discussion about this on the MOS talk page to find out what the consensus is. Ecrm87 (talk) 18:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! The only trimming i did to the infobox was to remove a wrong duplicate "works" parameter (which you brought back) and the "Education" parameter. I still believe that the school that he attended is not even close to a key fact (see Manual of Style for Infoboxes) and it's not used in any composer's infobox, or at least in any that i've seen. I would like to hear your reasoning as to why this is such a relevant fact. Cheers — Gor1995 𝄞 11:20, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's just such a samll difference. I myself went on the page to see where he was educated and had to scroll through it for 5 minutes trying to find the info. At least some people will look to see that so it's worth adding. Edward Jocob Philip Smith (talk) 15:09, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]