Talk:Dudley Ryder, 7th Earl of Harrowby

wikify
I will amend the use of the word "ousted" in the context of Lord's reform, as it seems to be perjorative. The reference to Coutts will be amended, and the text tidied.

I don't think the exhaustive list of "current" family is relevant unless these individuals are worthy of an entry in the encyclopedia in their own right, so I will delete them. Major Bloodnok 07:56, 30 October 2006 (UTC)


 * A list of immediate family and grandchildren have been re-added to this. I'm not sure this is relevant to wikipedia (to paraphrase the MOS "even if it's 100% true doesn't mean it should be included"). This family information may be important to the family itself, but should be in specialist publications such as Debrett's or Burke's peerages rather than here. For example, the 17th Earl of Norfolk's entry has information about the children, but no grandchildren on the page. Therefore, this information, if it should be included at all, should be within the entries of the 7th Earl of Harrowby's children, if they warrant a page on wikipedia. The test should be whether details of grandchildren, including their titles, are crucial to a better understand the life and career of the 7th Earl? The information to hand currently doesn't indicate this. By all means put this family data on other web-pages, or in the entry in a publication containing information about peers of the realm, but surely this stuff doesn't belong here? Major Bloodnok 16:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Grandchildren:

The Hon Hugo Ryder, The Hon Frederick Ryder, The Hon Henry Ryder, The Hon Emily Ryder, The Hon Henry Coram-James (M), The Hon Clementine Coram-James, The Hon Edward Coram-James. The Hon Thomas Rundall, The Hon Mark Rundall, The Hon Jack Rundall. Major Bloodnok 16:21, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Grandchildren have been added again. I think it is worth quoting part of the "what Wikipedia is not" page in full:

Wikipedia is not a directory
Wikipedia is not a directory of everything that exists or has existed. Wikipedia articles are not:
 * 1) Lists or repositories of loosely associated topics such as quotations, aphorisms, or persons (real or fictional). If you want to enter lists of quotations, put them into our sister project Wikiquote. Of course, there is nothing wrong with having lists if their entries are famous because they are associated with or significantly contributed to the list topic, for example Nixon's Enemies List. Wikipedia also includes reference tables and tabular information for quick reference. Merged groups of small articles based on a core topic are certainly permitted; see List of locations in Spira for an example.
 * 2) Genealogical entries or phonebook entries. Biography articles should only be for people with some sort of fame, achievement, or perhaps notoriety. One measure of publicity is whether someone has been featured in several external sources (on or off-line). Less well-known people may be mentioned within other articles (e.g. Ronald Gay in Persecution of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and the transgendered). See Wikipeople for a proposed genealogical/biographical dictionary project, and Wikitree for a project that aims to be the family tree of the human race. Wikipedia is not the white pages.


 * Info about the Burnt Norton house is more suitable for the main family page; I will move it there, and tidy up the family info accordingly. Major Bloodnok 13:12, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Oxford?
His obituary in the Times said he had to turn down his place at New College, Oxford to go work at Coutts in contradiction to this article which says he was educated at Oxford. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/obituaries/article2758719.ece 129.67.158.52 18:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)