Talk:Scam title

Repetitive
How is this different than http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_titles_of_nobility? 138.162.128.55 (talk) 13:12, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

This appears to duplicate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_titles_of_nobility, presumably in anticipation of its removal. Like the page it duplicates it offers no authoritative information, is partial and preachy, posted by somebody with an axe to grind. I recommend rapid deletion. Theblackbadger (talk) 15:54, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

I recommend merging this article into the False titles of nobility article. -L.Smithfield (talk) 05:11, 8 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Or visa-versa; merging False titles of nobility into this article. There are at least two different main issues to address with false titles though: 1) title scams (selling false titles), and 2) people assuming false titles presumably without scamming anyone else.  In both cases, the titles are invariably false -- essentially by definition.  But there is enough overlap in these two categories that a single article would seem to be sufficient to cover the subject of false titles in general. I leave this for the consideration of the primary contributors to these and related articles. Maybe the article False titles of nobility should be renamed to cover all false titles and not just noble ones.  Although many scams deal in false noble titles, as others have pointed out, many false titles sold today (Lairdships, Knighthoods, others, and perhaps Manorials) are, strictly speaking, indeed not noble.  But they are all still false. Yes, yes, in theory there can be true manorial titles sold (and Scottish baronies), but these are not the ones at issue with the various scams out there. So maybe a single article with a suitable title can cover all of these 'false title' cases. -L.Smithfield (talk) 05:32, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Promising to deal with a huge subject, this article deals only with one country and only one small area of titles. No mention of academic titles, religious titles, military titles. Even the sweeping assertions and generalisations that are made are mostly unreferenced, or reference only opinion sites such as that created by the Earl of Bradford. Rapid deletion would be a kindness to this sickly piece of writing. 82.132.213.61 (talk) 07:11, 18 April 2013 (UTC)