Talk:Recorder (legal office)

Honourary
This article sorta kinda implies that the position is honourary, which I interpret to mean that the person has not actual power or responsibilities, but that the appointment is simply a show of respect. The fact that I'm unsure of this shows that this article desperately needs some rewriting. D O N D E groovily  Talk to me  03:33, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I take that back, I misread. D O N D E groovily  Talk to me  04:53, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved for now. Please continue the merge discussion at Talk:Recorder (judge). Jafeluv (talk) 13:19, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Recorder (legal office) → Honorary Recorder — This seems to be the most common term for the modern version of this position. FYI, the historic version is described at Recorder (judge) D O N D E groovily   Talk to me  04:53, 8 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Oppose - I contest the assertion that Honorary Recorder (which is the correct spelling) is "the most common term for the modern version of this position". In the UK, Recorder (judge) is not an "historic version", but a current judicial office (in fact my best friend from school sits as a Recorder). So leave as is. – ukexpat (talk) 18:07, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment You're right about the spelling, I thought the "ou" was the British spelling (as this seems to be mainly a British position), but my mistake. Just to comment that this article is unclear as to the term for this position, and alternates between honorary recorder and recorder almost totally randomly. D O N D E groovily   Talk to me  02:24, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - I think the two articles are really talking about the same thing. The generic is Recorder (judge), but a subset of Recorderships are honorary appointments, rather than being a distinct office. A merger discussion at Talk:Recorder (judge) petered out in January 2010, but I would be in favour of a merger. – ukexpat (talk) 02:34, 9 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment Perhaps, then, an article called Honorary Recorder for the honorary appointments and Recorder for a judge? It sure appears that we have two different articles each describing two different things. D O N D E groovily   Talk to me  05:27, 9 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment - no, we need one article that deals with both as the honorary recorder is a subset of Recorder (judge) - I am agreeing with the merger proposal at Talk:Recorder (judge). – ukexpat (talk) 16:17, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.