I just took a look at the pages on the Peerages of England, Scotland, Great Britain, Ireland, and the UK, and what a surprise I received! It appears that several more peerage titles have articles of their own. Almost all Marquessates seem to have their own pages. Your effort is entirely commendable. I beg only to make one suggestion, that is, that when it is suggested that certain peers sat until 1999 in the House of Lords by virtue of an English or British peeragee, a reference be inserted to the House of Lords Act 1999, on which I have recently written an article (House of Lords Act 1999). Similarly, if I might suggest it, for Scottish peers a reference could be made to the Peerage Act 1963. I only suggest this because the reader might be left wondering as to why they ceased to sit by virtue of the peerage in 1963 or 1999.-- Lord Emsworth 23:18, Jan 22, 2004 (UTC)
I must confess this controversey over Prussia is perplexing. I'm glad to join the fray, but of all the things to argue about...Mackensen
Thank you for the input on Kathleen Kennedy--noble titles are baffling to me as an American. I can handle Mr., Mrs., Ms. and Dr., and after that my head spins. :) jengod 05:46, Jan 30, 2004 (UTC)
Hello, John.
I have recently re-structured the messy list of holders of the office of Lord Great Chamberlain. I would like your comments on the new table. Also, if you have it, I would like certain information on who succeeded the five daughters of Lord Lincolnshire. (I have already posted the question at alt.talk.royalty, but am yet to receive a response.) You can find anything I already know at User:Lord_Emsworth/To_Do. -- Emsworth 20:47, Jan 31, 2004 (UTC)
I think that it would be better to have a separate table of deputies. Sometimes, the deputies were husbands of female holders, and would not be included in the present table. -- Emsworth 21:12, Jan 31, 2004 (UTC)
Yeah, that's what I did, although I'm not sure it's right... john 21:32, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)