Talk:Richard Wellesley, 1st Marquess Wellesley/Archive 1

What was the name of Wellesley's peerage in the House of Lords?
The article about Garret Wesley, Wellesley's father, says (1) four sons were made peers in the House of Lords. It then says the Marquesate of Mornington and Barony of Maryborough were extict -- implying that the Marquesate of Mornington was an English peerage. It wasn't. It was an Irish peerage. Wellesley's highest rank in the peerage of Great Britain was simply a Baron. This article should state the name of his Barony in the peerage of Great Britain. The Garret Wesley article should include it too. -- Geo Swan 12:07, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Well I can see what you mean about the line . It doesn't say anything wrong but is perhaps unclear. I have added peerage of Ireland after the marquisate.


 * Someone may know but I believe the Michael_Carver%2C_Baron_Carver is a decendant of the marquess though one of his illegitimate sons. Alci12 17:33, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

There was no Marquessate of Mornington. There was a Marquessate of Wellesley. As I understand it, the 4 peerages would be - Richard: Baron Wellesley; William: Baron Maryborough; Arthur: Duke of Wellington, etc.; Henry: Baron Cowley. john k 19:45, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
 * They are john but the actual article didn't (at least when I read it) get the marquisate wrong so I wasn't too worried. Alci12 11:16, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Portrait with less beautification?
The portraits used to illustrate this article depict Richard with a shape of face which does not exist. What I mean is that the distances between the features of his face don’t mach any people living today. This is because the distances between his chin, mouth and nose where depicted as shorter than they where which was a common form of beautification at the time. I have a fuzzy memory of seeing a portrait of him in a history book without this type of beautification. If I remember it correctly it should depict him with the same shape of face as Tony Daniels. (I mean the actor and not the psychiatrist.) Anyone who can verify this?

2010-07-22 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.

while portraying his enemy as a cruel tyrant needing to be put down,
It seems there is a subtext in play here, which might fall into the category of 'weasel words'

If there were questions arising from the British pretext for the Mysore War of 1799, surely the they should be presented, with references, in the appropriate section of the article, not via an unsourced, oblique swipe in the introduction.

Moreover it indicates the defeat of Tippoo Sultan was a major event in his career. If this was so and thus merits a prominent mention in the introduction, I suggest it be presented in a more neutral fashion. JF42 (talk) 09:43, 11 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Its three months later and nobody has come to defend the inclusion of that line in the intro, so I removed it. Anyone that objects can discuss it here. My view is the same as yours, that this should be sourced and then included later in the article. LastDodo (talk) 18:37, 18 December 2021 (UTC)