Talk:William Cavendish, Earl of Burlington

Untitled
In the announcement of his engagement in The Times today he is called "the Earl of Burlington", so he obviously hasn't moved up the titles as we had assumed he had. Proteus (Talk) 09:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes I noticed that, rather inconsiderate of him!Alci12 15:10, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Hm, not sure about this. I would argue that he is the Marquess of Hartington (indeed, he is referred to as such in Burke's Peerage), but has chosen to remain known as Bill Burlington. This isn't uncommon: Michael Ancram did the same. His name is Michael Kerr, but he was the Earl of Ancram when he entered Parliament and styled himself as Michael Ancram (to avoid confusion regarding titles and eligibility for the lower house, one assumes). When his father died and he became a Marquess, he remained Michael Ancram in Parliament.

Wouldn't it make more sense to move this to William Cavendish, Marquess of Hartington, and retain the section explaining that he's still known as Bill Burlington? Obviously, happy to listen to other ideas if I've got it wrong. Phettyplace (Talk) 07:28, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I should add that I've seen there's been discussion of this before, I was just wondering if there were any actual evidence that he hasn't taken up the courtesy title beyond newspaper articles referring to him as the Earl of Burlington, which could after all merely be confused by the fact he chooses to be known as Bill Burlington?

As I say, very happy to be corrected. Phettyplace (Talk) 07:51, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Isn't actually more appropriate to say he doesn't "use" the title? I don't really think he can decide whether or not to actually assume it.Flyte35 (talk) 21:11, 11 April 2013 (UTC)