User:Alekksandr/Despenser

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Agricolae#le_Despenser/Despencer_family

le Despenser/Despencer family
In you edited Hugh le Despenser, Baron le Despenser (1338) so that his defaultsort is "Despenser, Hugh le, 2nd Baron", on the basis that "sources index them under D, not l". I note however that the following have a defaultsort under 'l' - Edward Despenser, 1st Baron Despenser, Francis Dashwood, 11th Baron le Despencer, Henry Wentworth (de jure 4th Baron le Despencer), Hugh Despenser the Younger, Margery le Despencer Philip le Despencer, 1st Baron le Despencer and Philip le Despencer, 2nd Baron le Despencer. I feel that whatever rule is adopted by Wikipedia should apply to all members of the family. Thoughts? Alekksandr (talk) 20:16, 26 March 2020 (UTC)


 * CP lists all of these families in the D volume and not the L volume. ODNB doesn't even include the 'le' for the Hughs and their kin in their names or titles, they are just Baron Despenser, all listed under Despenser and not le Despenser. However, after the title was called out of abeyance, they do refer to Thomas Wentworth as Baron le Despenser (but he is indexed under W).  It is a bit tricky when you talk about some of these titles, called out of abeyance during the 17th century when the writs included all sorts of affectations in the names (such as names beginning with Ff in copying the style of older records that used ff simply to represent a capital F). Sources trend to treat the latter writs as binding on the style used for their descendants, making the Fanes and Wentworths le Despenser (in HOP, for example, Henry Fane is listed under F, but after his ennoblement he is referred to repeatedly simply as "le Despenser"), but not binding on the former, where the early families whose names and titles arose more organically are almost universally indexed and referred to in passing without the 'de' or 'le' - as Whitney, Cromwell, Warenne, and Despenser. The case of Edward is particularly odd, in that he is Defaultsorted under Despenser, but for individual categories it is under 'le', even though 'le' has been completely removed from article title itself (plus there is an unnoticed case of vandalism there, where someone has substituted the name Brendan in one of the entries). Agricolae (talk) 21:45, 26 March 2020 (UTC)


 * CP names:-
 * 1. Hugh Despenser the elder as 'SIR HUGH LE DESPENSER'...'LORD LE DESPENSER'


 * 2. Hugh Despenser the Younger as 'SIR HUGH LE DESPENSER'... LORD LE DESPENSER'


 * 3. Hugh le Despenser, Baron le Despenser (1338) as 'SIR HUGH LE DESPENSER'... LORD LE DESPENSER'


 * 4. Edward Despenser, 1st Baron Despenser as 'SIR EDWARD LE DESPENSER'... 'LORD LE DESPENSER'


 * 5. Thomas Despenser, 1st Earl of Gloucester as "THOMAS (LE DESPENSER), LORD DESPENSER OR LE DESPENSER


 * 6. Mary Fane, 3rd Baroness le Despencer as "DAME MARY FANE'... 'BARONESS LE DESPENSER"


 * I suggest that we should treat CP as the definitive source for the format of the peerage/title, and that entries in Category:Barons in the Peerage of England and its subcategories are sorted according to the peerage/title.
 * Alekksandr (talk) 12:35, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
 * This is picking and choosing. CP 'sorts' (alphabetizes) all Despensers under D. We should do the same. Agricolae (talk) 13:14, 29 March 2020 (UTC)